BOSTON – Five men and one woman have been charged in three indictments with drug and firearm offenses following an investigation of a drug ring operating in and around Wareham and New Bedford.
Steven Miranda, 52, of Wareham; Manuel Pina-Agee, 32; Clifford Gomes, 53; and Casey Andrade, 37, all of New Bedford, were each charged with conspiring to distribute fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, and marijuana. The indictment alleges the conspiracy involved more than 40 grams of fentanyl and more than 10 grams of furanyl fentanyl, a fentanyl analogue. All four men are also charged with possessing fentanyl with the intent to distribute it in April of 2019. In addition, Pina-Agee and Gomes are charged with possessing a firearm after having been convicted of a crime punishable by more than one year in prison.
Jarrett Galloway, 28, of New Bedford, was charged in a separate indictment with distributing and possessing with intent to distribute fentanyl on Jan. 29, 2019, and possessing cocaine with intent to distribute it on April 25, 2019.
Jodi Smith, 33, formerly of Wareham, was charged in a third indictment with three counts of distributing fentanyl in January and February 2019.
Pina-Agee, Andrade, and Smith were arrested on April 25, 2019, and charged by criminal complaint. Pina-Agee is detained and Andrade and Smith were released on conditions. Gomes, Miranda, and Galloway were arrested on state charges on April 25, 2019. The state charges are expected to be dismissed in lieu of federal prosecution.
For Pina-Agee, Gomes, Miranda, and Andrade, the conspiracy charge carries a mandatory minimum sentence of five years and up to 40 years in prison, a minimum of four and up to a lifetime of supervised release, and a fine of $5 million. For Pina-Agee, the charge of possession with intent to distribute carries a mandatory minimum sentence of five years and up to 40 years in prison, a minimum of four years and up to a lifetime of supervised release, and a fine of up to $5 million. The other drug charges each carry a sentence of no greater than 20 years in prison, a minimum of three years and up to a lifetime of supervised release, and a fine of $1 million. The firearm charges carry a sentence of no greater than 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a fine of up to $250,000. Sentences are imposed by a federal district court judge based upon the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
United States Attorney Andrew E. Lelling; Brian D. Boyle, Special Agent in Charge of the Drug Enforcement Agency, New England Field Division; Kelly D. Brady, Special Agent in Charge of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Boston Field Division; and Acting Wareham Police Chief John Walcek made the announcement. The Sandwich, Carver, Middleboro, and New Bedford Police Departments also participated in the investigation, as did the Internal Revenue Service and Homeland Security Investigations. Assistant U.S. Attorney Ted Heinrich of Lelling’s Criminal Division is prosecuting the case.
The details contained in the charging documents are allegations. The defendants remain innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
BOSTON – An Acushnet man pleaded guilty yesterday in federal court in Boston to conspiracy to distribute fentanyl and illegal firearm possession.
Clifford Gomes, 54, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute fentanyl, one count of possession with intent to distribute fentanyl and one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition. U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani scheduled sentencing for June 16, 2020. Gomes was indicted by a federal grand jury on May 15, 2019.
Between January 2018 and April 2019 Gomes conspired with Manuel Pina-Agee, and others, to distribute and possess with intent to distribute fentanyl.
On Nov. 26, 2019, Pina-Agee pleaded guilty to various drug trafficking charges and illegal possession of firearms. Pina-Agee is scheduled to be sentenced on March 27, 2020.
The charge of conspiracy to distribute fentanyl provides for a sentence of up to 40 years in prison, four years of supervised release and a fine of up to $5 million. The charge of distribution of fentanyl provides for a sentence of up to 20 years in prison, at least three years of supervised release and a fine of up to $1 million. The charge of being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition provides for a sentence of up to 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release and a fine of up to $250,000. Sentences are imposed by a federal district court judge based upon the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
United States Attorney Andrew Lelling and Brian D. Boyle, Special Agent in Charge of the Drug Enforcement Administration, New England Division, made the announcement. Assistance was provided by the New Bedford, Wareham and Seekonk Police Departments. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Theodore B. Heinrich and Alathea E. Porter of Lelling’s Narcotics and Money Laundering Unit are prosecuting the case.
BOSTON – Five men and one woman have been charged in three indictments with drug and firearm offenses following an investigation of a drug ring operating in and around Wareham and New Bedford.
Steven Miranda, 52, of Wareham; Manuel Pina-Agee, 32; Clifford Gomes, 53; and Casey Andrade, 37, all of New Bedford, were each charged with conspiring to distribute fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, and marijuana. The indictment alleges the conspiracy involved more than 40 grams of fentanyl and more than 10 grams of furanyl fentanyl, a fentanyl analogue. All four men are also charged with possessing fentanyl with the intent to distribute it in April of 2019. In addition, Pina-Agee and Gomes are charged with possessing a firearm after having been convicted of a crime punishable by more than one year in prison.
Jarrett Galloway, 28, of New Bedford, was charged in a separate indictment with distributing and possessing with intent to distribute fentanyl on Jan. 29, 2019, and possessing cocaine with intent to distribute it on April 25, 2019.
Jodi Smith, 33, formerly of Wareham, was charged in a third indictment with three counts of distributing fentanyl in January and February 2019.
Pina-Agee, Andrade, and Smith were arrested on April 25, 2019, and charged by criminal complaint. Pina-Agee is detained and Andrade and Smith were released on conditions. Gomes, Miranda, and Galloway were arrested on state charges on April 25, 2019. The state charges are expected to be dismissed in lieu of federal prosecution.
For Pina-Agee, Gomes, Miranda, and Andrade, the conspiracy charge carries a mandatory minimum sentence of five years and up to 40 years in prison, a minimum of four and up to a lifetime of supervised release, and a fine of $5 million. For Pina-Agee, the charge of possession with intent to distribute carries a mandatory minimum sentence of five years and up to 40 years in prison, a minimum of four years and up to a lifetime of supervised release, and a fine of up to $5 million. The other drug charges each carry a sentence of no greater than 20 years in prison, a minimum of three years and up to a lifetime of supervised release, and a fine of $1 million. The firearm charges carry a sentence of no greater than 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a fine of up to $250,000. Sentences are imposed by a federal district court judge based upon the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
United States Attorney Andrew E. Lelling; Brian D. Boyle, Special Agent in Charge of the Drug Enforcement Agency, New England Field Division; Kelly D. Brady, Special Agent in Charge of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Boston Field Division; and Acting Wareham Police Chief John Walcek made the announcement. The Sandwich, Carver, Middleboro, and New Bedford Police Departments also participated in the investigation, as did the Internal Revenue Service and Homeland Security Investigations. Assistant U.S. Attorney Ted Heinrich of Lelling’s Criminal Division is prosecuting the case.
The details contained in the charging documents are allegations. The defendants remain innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fourth highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE4
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE4
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fourth highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE4
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE4
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
BOSTON – Five men and one woman have been charged in three indictments with drug and firearm offenses following an investigation of a drug ring operating in and around Wareham and New Bedford.
Steven Miranda, 52, of Wareham; Manuel Pina-Agee, 32; Clifford Gomes, 53; and Casey Andrade, 37, all of New Bedford, were each charged with conspiring to distribute fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, and marijuana. The indictment alleges the conspiracy involved more than 40 grams of fentanyl and more than 10 grams of furanyl fentanyl, a fentanyl analogue. All four men are also charged with possessing fentanyl with the intent to distribute it in April of 2019. In addition, Pina-Agee and Gomes are charged with possessing a firearm after having been convicted of a crime punishable by more than one year in prison.
Jarrett Galloway, 28, of New Bedford, was charged in a separate indictment with distributing and possessing with intent to distribute fentanyl on Jan. 29, 2019, and possessing cocaine with intent to distribute it on April 25, 2019.
Jodi Smith, 33, formerly of Wareham, was charged in a third indictment with three counts of distributing fentanyl in January and February 2019.
Pina-Agee, Andrade, and Smith were arrested on April 25, 2019, and charged by criminal complaint. Pina-Agee is detained and Andrade and Smith were released on conditions. Gomes, Miranda, and Galloway were arrested on state charges on April 25, 2019. The state charges are expected to be dismissed in lieu of federal prosecution.
For Pina-Agee, Gomes, Miranda, and Andrade, the conspiracy charge carries a mandatory minimum sentence of five years and up to 40 years in prison, a minimum of four and up to a lifetime of supervised release, and a fine of $5 million. For Pina-Agee, the charge of possession with intent to distribute carries a mandatory minimum sentence of five years and up to 40 years in prison, a minimum of four years and up to a lifetime of supervised release, and a fine of up to $5 million. The other drug charges each carry a sentence of no greater than 20 years in prison, a minimum of three years and up to a lifetime of supervised release, and a fine of $1 million. The firearm charges carry a sentence of no greater than 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a fine of up to $250,000. Sentences are imposed by a federal district court judge based upon the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
United States Attorney Andrew E. Lelling; Brian D. Boyle, Special Agent in Charge of the Drug Enforcement Agency, New England Field Division; Kelly D. Brady, Special Agent in Charge of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Boston Field Division; and Acting Wareham Police Chief John Walcek made the announcement. The Sandwich, Carver, Middleboro, and New Bedford Police Departments also participated in the investigation, as did the Internal Revenue Service and Homeland Security Investigations. Assistant U.S. Attorney Ted Heinrich of Lelling’s Criminal Division is prosecuting the case.
The details contained in the charging documents are allegations. The defendants remain innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Greenbelt, Maryland – U.S. District Judge George J. Hazel today sentenced Christopher Paul Hasson, age 50, of Silver Spring, Maryland, to 160 months in federal prison, followed by four years of supervised release, on four federal charges, including unlawful possession of unregistered silencers, unlawful possession of firearm silencers unidentified by serial number, possession of firearms by an addict to and unlawful user of a controlled substance, and possession of a controlled substance. Hasson has been detained since his arrest on February 15, 2019.
The sentence was announced by United States Attorney for the District of Maryland Robert K. Hur; Special Agent in Charge Jennifer C. Boone of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Baltimore Field Office; Special Agent in Charge Art Walker of the U.S. Coast Guard Investigative Service; and Acting Special Agent in Charge Toni Crosby of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Baltimore Field Division.
“Preserving our nation’s security against terrorist threats continues to be the Justice Department’s top priority. Lives were saved due to the skill and dedication of law enforcement in this case. Christopher Hasson intended to inflict violence on the basis of his racist and hateful beliefs. As long as violent extremists take steps to harm innocent people, we will continue to use all of the tools we have to prevent and deter them,” said United States Attorney Robert K. Hur.
“The FBI remains committed to combatting terrorism, both domestic and international, and we remain fully prepared to take those actions necessary to safeguard our communities,” said Special Agent in Charge Jennifer Boone. “We will use every tool given to us by the Department of Justice and Congress to disrupt Racially Motivated Violent Extremist activity. However, protection of our communities and our nation is a shared responsibility, and we must combat terrorism as a united force against all forms of violent hate.”
According to his plea agreement, Hasson was a Lieutenant in the United States Coast Guard. Prior to June 2016, Hasson owned a residence and lived in Currituck, North Carolina. In approximately June 2016, Hasson moved to a residence in Silver Spring, Maryland, and worked at Coast Guard Headquarters in Washington, D.C.
As detailed in the government’s sentencing memo and presented to the Court during the sentencing hearing, Christopher Hasson self-identified as a “White Nationalist” for over 30 years and in writings advocated for “focused violence” in order to establish a white homeland. Review of Hasson’s e-mail accounts, saved documents, text messages, and Internet searches show that he was inspired by racist murderers, stockpiled assault weapons, studied violence, and intended to exact retribution on minorities and those he considered traitors.
Hasson admitted that from at least March 2016 through early February 2019, he used various e-mail accounts, including an overseas encrypted e-mail account, to order Tramadol, which is an opioid, from various illegal Internet-based distributors. Hasson usually paid for the Tramadol by wiring money to individuals in Mexico, at the direction of the Mexico-based distributor, who then had the Tramadol shipped to Hasson, typically in 100mg pills, at addresses Hasson provided, including his North Carolina and Maryland residences. Hasson admitted that he then concealed the Tramadol in other packaging at his residence and work and personally took the pills, usually daily, including while he was at work.
As detailed in his plea agreement, at the time of Hasson’s arrest on February 15, 2019, agents recovered 196 Tramadol pills from Hasson’s backpack. Search warrants executed the same day recovered 106 Tramadol pills from Hasson’s desk at Coast Guard Headquarters and 122 Tramadol pills from Hasson’s residence. From Hasson’s residence, law enforcement also recovered the following firearms: seven rifles; two shotguns; four pistols; two revolvers; an assembled firearm silencer; and a disassembled firearm silencer. In close proximity to the guns, agents found multiple magazines that could accept more than 15 rounds of ammunition, as well as hundreds of rounds of ammunition. Hasson ordered the components of the firearm silencers from a company in California and used a drill to complete and assemble one firearm silencer. Hasson knew the firearm silencers were not registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record, and that they did not have serial numbers, as required by law.
As detailed in court documents, to prepare himself to take action, in addition to the firearms and silencers referenced above, Hasson purchased holsters, knives, magazines, ammunition, handguards, camping supplies, Meals-Ready-to-Eat, steel body armor plates, plate carriers, tactical vests and pouches, firearm repair kits, and smoke grenades. Hasson also e-mailed to his Coast Guard computer the manifestos of mass murderer Anders Breivik and Unabomber Ted Kaczynski, as well as the memoir of Eric Rudolph, the 1996 Atlanta Olympics bomber, titled “Between the Lines of Drift: The Memoirs of a Militant.” Hasson referred to those documents in his own writings. Hasson registered for an online sniper and sharpshooter forum, studied sniper tactics, and purchased high-end scopes and a sniper rifle. Internet searches performed by Hasson show that he targeted potential victims, including media personalities and current and former elected officials.
United States Attorney Robert K. Hur commended the FBI, the U.S. Coast Guard Investigative Service, and the ATF for their work in the investigation. Mr. Hur thanked his office’s national security prosecutors, who handled the case.
# # #
Greenbelt, Maryland –Christopher Paul Hasson, age 50, of Silver Spring, Maryland, pleaded guilty today in U.S. District Court in Maryland to four federal charges, including unlawful possession of unregistered silencers, unlawful possession of firearm silencers unidentified by serial number, possession of firearms by an addict to and unlawful user of a controlled substance, and possession of a controlled substance. Hasson was arrested on related charges on February 15, 2019, and has been detained since his arrest.
The guilty plea was announced by United States Attorney for the District of Maryland Robert K. Hur; Special Agent in Charge Jennifer C. Boone of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Baltimore Field Office; Special Agent in Charge Art Walker of the U.S. Coast Guard Investigative Service; and Special Agent in Charge Rob Cekada of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Baltimore Field Division.
“I am grateful for the hard work of the agents and prosecutors to obtain this guilty plea. I look forward to the opportunity for the government to present additional evidence to the Court at sentencing,” said United States Attorney Robert K. Hur.
According to his plea agreement, Hasson was a Lieutenant in the United States Coast Guard. Prior to June 2016, Hasson owned a residence and lived in Currituck, North Carolina. In approximately June 2016, Hasson moved to a residence in Silver Spring, Maryland, and worked at Coast Guard Headquarters in Washington, D.C.
Hasson admitted that from at least March 2016 through early February 2019, he used various e-mail accounts, including an overseas encrypted e-mail account, to order Tramadol, which is an opioid, from various illegal Internet-based distributors. Hasson usually paid for the Tramadol by using MoneyGram or Western Union to send money to individuals in Mexico, at the direction of the Mexico-based distributor. The distributor then had the Tramadol shipped to Hasson, typically in 100mg pills, at addresses Hasson provided, including his North Carolina and Maryland residences. Hasson admitted that he then concealed the Tramadol in other packaging at his residence and work. Hasson ordered at least 4,650 Tramadol pills and personally took the pills, usually daily, including while he was at work. Hasson knew that he did not have a lawful prescription for Tramadol and that his possession of the drug was illegal. During the time of his use of Tramadol, Hasson also conducted Internet searches and visited websites that discussed addiction and Tramadol withdrawal.
As detailed in his plea agreement, at the time of Hasson’s arrest on February 15, 2019, agents recovered 196 Tramadol pills from Hasson’s backpack. Search warrants executed the same day recovered 106 Tramadol pills from Hasson’s desk at Coast Guard Headquarters and 122 Tramadol pills from Hasson’s residence. From Hasson’s residence, law enforcement also recovered the following firearms: seven rifles; two shotguns; four pistols; two revolvers; an assembled firearm silencer; and a disassembled firearm silencer. In close proximity to the guns, agents found multiple magazines that could accept more than 15 rounds of ammunition, as well as hundreds of rounds of ammunition.
According to the plea agreement, Hasson ordered the components of the firearm silencers from a company in California and used a drill to complete and assemble one firearm silencer. Hasson knew the firearm silencers were not registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record, and that they did not have serial numbers, as required by law.
Hasson faces a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison for each of the three charges related to firearms and the firearm silencers, and a maximum of one year in prison for possession of tramadol. U.S. District Judge George J. Hazel has scheduled sentencing for January 31, 2020, at 9:30 a.m.
United States Attorney Robert K. Hur commended the FBI, the U.S. Coast Guard Investigative Service, and the ATF for their work in the investigation. Mr. Hur thanked his office’s national security prosecutors, who are handling the case.
# # #
Greenbelt, Maryland – A federal grand jury today indicted Christopher Paul Hasson, age 49, of Silver Spring, Maryland, on federal charges for unlawful possession of silencers, for possession of firearms by a drug addict and unlawful user, and for possession of a controlled substance. Hasson was arrested on related charges on February 15, 2019, and has been detained since his arrest.
The indictment was announced by United States Attorney for the District of Maryland Robert K. Hur; Special Agent in Charge Gordon B. Johnson of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Baltimore Field Office; Special Agent in Charge Art Walker of the U.S. Coast Guard Investigative Service; and Special Agent in Charge Rob Cekada of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Baltimore Field Division.
U.S. Attorney Robert K. Hur stated, “We continue to gather evidence, as well as review evidence already obtained as part of this ongoing investigation.”
According to the indictment and other court documents, Hasson, a Lieutenant in the United States Coast Guard, is charged with illegal possession of two silencers. Federal law requires silencers to bear serial numbers and to be registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record. The silencers in Hasson’s possession met neither criteria. The indictment further alleges that Hasson is an unlawful user and addict of a controlled substance, and therefore prohibited from possessing the seventeen firearms in his possession. A search warrant executed at Hasson’s residence on February 15, 2019, recovered the following firearms, which are referenced in the indictment: seven rifles; two shotguns; four pistols; two revolvers; an assembled firearm silencer; and a disassembled firearm silencer. Finally, the indictment alleges that Hasson possessed tramadol, a controlled substance that is classified by the Drug Enforcement Administration as an opioid analgesic.
If convicted, Hasson faces a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison for each of the three charges related to firearms and the firearm silencers, and a maximum of one year in prison for possession of tramadol. An arraignment in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt has not yet been scheduled.
An indictment is not a finding of guilt. An individual charged by indictment is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty at some later criminal proceedings.
United States Attorney Robert K. Hur commended the FBI, the U.S. Coast Guard Investigative Service, and the ATF for their work in the investigation. Mr. Hur thanked his office’s national security prosecutors, who are handling the case.
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fourth highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE4
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE4
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fifth highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE5
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE5
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE5
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE5
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fourth highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE4
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE4
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fifth highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE5
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE5
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE5
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE5
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The number of days from the earlier of filing date or first appearance date to proceeding date
Format: N3
Description: The number of days from proceeding date to disposition date
Format: N3
Description: The number of days from disposition date to sentencing date
Format: N3
Description: The code of the district office where the case was terminated
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant at the time the case was closed
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense that carried the most severe disposition and penalty under which the defendant was disposed
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE1
Format: N4
Description: A code indicating whether the prison sentence associated with TTITLE1 was concurrent or consecutive in relation to the other counts in the indictment or information or multiple counts of the same charge
Format: A4
Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N4
Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N3
Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE1
Format: N8
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense under which the defendant was disposed that carried the second most severe disposition and penalty
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE2
Format: N4
Description: A code indicating whether the prison sentence associated with TTITLE2 was concurrent or consecutive in relation to the other counts in the indictment or information or multiple counts of the same charge
Format: A4
Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE2
Format: N4
Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE2
Format: N3
Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE2
Format: N8
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense under which the defendant was disposed that carried the third most severe
disposition and penalty
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE3
Format: N4
Description: A code indicating whether the prison sentence associated with TTITLE3 was concurrent or consecutive in relation to the other counts in the indictment or information or multiple counts of the same charge
Format: A4
Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE3
Format: N4
Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE3
Format: N3
Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE3
Format: N8
Description: The total prison time for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and prison time was imposed
Format: N4
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The number of days from the earlier of filing date or first appearance date to proceeding date
Format: N3
Description: The number of days from proceeding date to disposition date
Format: N3
Description: The number of days from disposition date to sentencing date
Format: N3
Description: The code of the district office where the case was terminated
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant at the time the case was closed
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense that carried the most severe disposition and penalty under which the defendant was disposed
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE1
Format: N4
Description: A code indicating whether the prison sentence associated with TTITLE1 was concurrent or consecutive in relation to the other counts in the indictment or information or multiple counts of the same charge
Format: A4
Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N4
Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N3
Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE1
Format: N8
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense under which the defendant was disposed that carried the second most severe disposition and penalty
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE2
Format: N4
Description: A code indicating whether the prison sentence associated with TTITLE2 was concurrent or consecutive in relation to the other counts in the indictment or information or multiple counts of the same charge
Format: A4
Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE2
Format: N4
Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE2
Format: N3
Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE2
Format: N8
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense under which the defendant was disposed that carried the third most severe
disposition and penalty
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE3
Format: N4
Description: A code indicating whether the prison sentence associated with TTITLE3 was concurrent or consecutive in relation to the other counts in the indictment or information or multiple counts of the same charge
Format: A4
Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE3
Format: N4
Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE3
Format: N3
Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE3
Format: N8
Description: The total prison time for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and prison time was imposed
Format: N4
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The number of days from the earlier of filing date or first appearance date to proceeding date
Format: N3
Description: The number of days from proceeding date to disposition date
Format: N3
Description: The number of days from disposition date to sentencing date
Format: N3
Description: The code of the district office where the case was terminated
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant at the time the case was closed
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense that carried the most severe disposition and penalty under which the defendant was disposed
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE1
Format: N4
Description: A code indicating whether the prison sentence associated with TTITLE1 was concurrent or consecutive in relation to the other counts in the indictment or information or multiple counts of the same charge
Format: A4
Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N4
Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N3
Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE1
Format: N8
Description: The total prison time for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and prison time was imposed
Format: N4
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
New Haven – The United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut hosted a Community Policing Awards Ceremony this afternoon that recognized 29 law enforcement officers and community members from cities and towns across the state.
“Our honorees represent the very best in community policing,” said U.S. Attorney Deirdre M. Daly. “In innovative and practical ways, they have reached out to make meaningful connections with people living in our communities. We thank them for their commitment to building public trust and strengthening relationships between the police and the communities they serve. The importance of this work can never be overstated. If the public does not have confidence in the police, they may well not report crimes, cooperate in criminal investigations or support our justice system. We applaud them and we thank them for their dedicated and invaluable service. They have made lasting and purposeful contributions to ensuring that Connecticut is a safer and more secure place to live.”
Below is a list of the award winners and the nominations submitted on their behalf.
(Photos of today’s ceremony are available on our Facebook page.)
We are all well aware of events that have taken place across our nation that have strained relations between the community and the police. In Bristol, the Bristol Police Department took proactive measures to ensure its community that the police department was committed to working together to strengthen relationships. This was a team effort and many great relationships were developed. Three stars on this team certainly went above and beyond: Pastor Patricia Washington-Rice, Morris “Rippy” Patton and Bristol Police Officer James Pelletier.
Pastor Rice sits on the Executive Board of the Bristol NAACP and is Pastor of the Beulah AME Zion Church in Bristol. Pastor Rice took the lead on improving relations between the community and the police by opening her church to the public on several occasions. Members of the Bristol Police Department, Bristol NAACP and other community members held several forums at the Church to exchange thoughts, ideas, etc., all with the intent of strengthening our bond.
Mr. Patton, who insists on going by the name of “Rippy,” is 2nd Vice President of the Bristol NAACP. It was Rippy’s idea to hold a softball tournament to promote local unity. Our first tournament was held on September 17, 2016, and the second, this past September. The teams consisted of Bristol Police Officers, Bristol Firefighters, Bristol EMS, Bristol Teachers and individuals from our community. The tournament, titled “WE ARE ONE,” consisted of several teams in which the team members were randomly selected. The goal was to have representatives from each of the above groups play together as teammates. Rippy wanted to demonstrate that there was no “us vs. them” and that we all could come together as one and have a great time.
Officer Pelletier has been a member of the Bristol Police Department for over nine years and utilizes his free time volunteering to sit on several local committees. He chooses to take on leadership roles so that he can be more involved and influential. Officer Pelletier has been at the table when meeting with our local community leaders such as the Bristol NAACP and he worked very closely with Rippy Patton in coordinating the WE ARE ONE softball tournaments. This past year, Officer Pelletier was asked to become more involved in raising funds for the Connecticut Special Olympics. Typically, the Bristol Police Department would raise about $5,000 -$6,000 a year for the Special Olympics. Officer Pelletier hit the ground running and his extraordinary efforts have resulted in the Bristol Police Department raising in excess of $20,000 to date, for the Connecticut Special Olympics.
These three have helped make Bristol a better place to live!
Clinton Police DepartmentSergeant Jeremiah Dunn
Sergeant Dunn is currently assigned to the Patrol Division as an evening shift supervisor and is also assigned as the Department’s Public Information Officer. Additionally, Sergeant Dunn acts as the President of the Clinton Police Benevolent Association. He is truly an example of community policing spirit. Annually, Sergeant Dunn runs Clinton’s Citizen’s Police Academy, a program that runs for 10 weeks each year and provides citizens of Clinton with an in-depth look at the many facets of modern policing. He has run the academy for groups of 25 to 30 Clinton residents per year and has received rave reviews for the past 21 years. Sergeant Dunn also organizes the department’s fundraising events, coordinates the annual participation in the Connecticut Special Olympics, and spearheads the Department’s annual toy drive every Christmas season.
Sergeant Dunn is always looking for ways to help others in need and often encourages other officers in the Department to do the same. A perfect example of this was when a 10-year-old boy announced at a community meeting that his birthday was the next day but later noted that he was not expecting any presents because his family could not afford them. That night Sergeant Dunn, with Officer Adrian Santiago, appeared at the child’s house with a new bicycle, a skateboard, a toy badge, and DARE bracelet so that the child would have gifts to open the next day. On that next day, the Clinton Police Department brought the child a cake and sang happy birthday to him. This truly represents who Sergeant Dunn is as a person. He continues to build strong relationships with the community he serves and the public at large with his compassion and caring, particularly for those with special needs or those in difficult situations.
Connecticut Police Chiefs AssociationChief Vernon RiddickChief John GavallasChief Douglas Fuchs
While generally these nominations include the patrol ranks, these three police chiefs have fought hard to develop and implement the Breaking Barriers Program in an effort to foster improved communications between law enforcement and motorists during a traffic stop.
The program has been developed in partnership with multiple community leaders, members of the public, and public relations professionals to ensure that any curriculum developed and message communicated would be one which was inclusive, tested, and a collaboration between the police and the communities whom they serve.
Breaking Barriers is aimed at improving interactions between the police and the public during traffic stops, with the ultimate goal of making everyone safer during this police encounter. Police in Connecticut conduct in excess of 700,000 motor vehicle stops each year – it is by far the most likely encounter the public might have with the police. Working with civil rights organizations and youth from across Connecticut, a slogan and artwork (or branding) was developed to begin to collaboratively develop the curriculum for this program.
By working with Driver’s Education and community based programs, police officers across Connecticut have become a part of the learning process for new drivers – teaching what to expect during a traffic stop and how police and the public can work together to ensure that all motor vehicle stops are as safe and comfortable for all involved as is possible. While a particular traffic stop might be their fifth of the day – it might be the first time that a motorist has ever been pulled over. Educating motorists that although traffic stops are something police officers do with great frequency, they can also be an extremely dangerous task – reminding all that one might be the most congenial of people – never have committed a violation of law – and have been stopped for a minor traffic offense – but the police officer has no way of knowing that when approaching your vehicle. It is about mutual respect and understanding.
Connecticut State PoliceDetective Michael MudryTraining Coordinator Wayne KowalDirector, Griswold Pride, Miranda Nagle
The Bureau of Special Investigation recently implemented a new community oriented police outreach program named “CRISIS,” standing for Connection to Recovery through Intervention, Support & Initiating Services. The geographic focal point of the pilot initiative was and is Griswold due to the high number of NARCAN deployments and attendant lives saved, all associated with the ongoing opioid epidemic being experienced in the State of Connecticut.
In its broadest sense, the CRISIS Initiative is a partnership between the Connecticut State Police, the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS), Southeastern Mental Health Authority, Griswold PRIDE, the Connecticut Community for Addiction Recovery (CCAR), the Connecticut Alliance to Benefit Law Enforcement (CABLE), other non-profit organizations, and the community at large. The benefit to this initiative is to provide the community with a healthier quality of life, to enhance the community’s relationship and trust with law enforcement, and ultimately, to provide a fast track into recovery services. Through collaboration with the above-mentioned organizations, a “bridge was built” to provide healthier outcomes for individuals and families struggling with addiction and mental health issues.
Our partnership with DMHAS has allowed for a full-time Licensed Clinical Social Worker that is available to conduct immediate assessments and assist people in need of addiction and/or mental health services to be tasked to this program. In addition, a formal referral system was developed, utilized by State Troopers and Dispatchers that provide individuals in need a direct avenue into the DMHAS system.
This initiative would not have come to fruition if not for the determination, perseverance, and tireless efforts of Detective Michael Mudry, Training Coordinator Wayne Kowal, and Director Miranda Nagle to collaborate and build relationships with community leaders such as the Griswold First Selectman, DMHAS, CCAR, Troop “E” personnel, and most importantly, the residents within the community of Griswold. All were instrumental in the development of the policy and procedures of the CRISIS Initiative. Their commitment and dedication is in the highest tradition of the Connecticut State Police.
East Hartford Police DepartmentOfficer Ted Branon
Recognizing the paramount need to improve community/police relations everywhere, the East Hartford Police Department appealed to the Town Council for approval of a full-time Community Service Officer. Upon Council approval, veteran Officer Ted Branon was selected from a number of internal applicants and went to work in this new position one year ago.
During the last year, Officer Branon has rewritten the manual on Community Policing and set the standard for successful relations between police departments and the communities they serve. He has been involved in organizing successful Coffee With A Cop events and the Department's first-ever participation in National Night Out; conducting Neighborhood Block Watch meetings; coordinating Convenience Store and Unlicensed Repair Shop compliance checks; hosting youth, elderly, and school safety seminars; participating in stuff-a-cruiser events and toy drives, as well as assisting with food-share and clothing donations for those less fortunate; and even organizing regular “roundtable” meetings bringing clergy from every religious organization in Town together at once to discuss and share community affairs, all while augmenting patrol enforcement of Town Ordinances designed to regulate blight and improve neighborhood quality of life.
Also, this past summer, Officer Branon created a weekly Youth Basketball Program designed to build relationships between East Hartford youth, Police Officers, and the community through positive engagement and to provide a structured environment for the youth to learn, develop, and improve their basketball skills. The instructor staff, made up of East Hartford Police Officers, focused on individual and team fundamental skills, while emphasizing the importance of teamwork, respect, attention to detail, effective communication, and knowledge of the game - with the overall goal of having fun and getting to know a police officer in town. The program was a tremendous success and will return next summer.
Whether in a group setting or one-on-one, Officer Branon's efforts toward combining aspects of traditional law enforcement while incorporating crime prevention and problem solving through community engagements and partnerships have forged a necessary bond among residents of the community and the Department. Communication between citizens and police has improved, fear of crime has been reduced and mutual trust and understanding has been enhanced. In just one short year, Officer Branon has led the mission to help the East Hartford Police Department and the community they serve unite as partners with measurable success.
East Haven Police DepartmentLieutenant David Emerman
Lieutenant Emerman has been an integral member of the East Haven Police Department since 2004 and has been instrumental in helping reform the Department into a community-driven law enforcement agency that is nationally recognized as change leaders in 21st Century Policing. Lieutenant Emerman is bilingual, in English and Spanish, and serves as the Language Access Coordinator and Community Liaison Officer for the Department. In this capacity, he has forged strong relationships within the community, with community stakeholders, as well as the Ecuadorian Consulate. He is well respected and possesses all the qualities necessary to engage and improve relations between police and the community they serve.
In June 2016, Lieutenant Emerman was appointed as the Compliance Coordinator to the U.S. Department of Justice Settlement Agreement for the Town of East Haven. He is responsible for ensuring compliance with our settlement agreement as well as all communications and coordination between the Department and the U.S. Department of Justice.
Greenwich Police DepartmentCommunity Impact Section Sergeant John ThormeCommunity Impact Officer Keith HirschCommunity Impact Officer Daniel Paladino
Over the past few years, Greenwich Police Department Community Impact Section Sergeant John Thorme, Community Impact Officer Keith Hirsch, and Community Impact Officer Daniel Paladino have successfully conducted the following community programs that have strengthened community relations between the Police Department and the citizens of the community.
They have coordinated Spring and Fall 7-week Citizen’s Police Academy (CPA) programs (In 2016 a department record of 93 people graduated from the CPA); a one-week Spring Youth Citizen’s Police Academy (Police Explorer Camp for 7th, 8th, and 9th grade students though the Boy Scouts) consisting of approximately 45 participants; and Spring and Fall 6-week Women’s Self Defense classes, along with a Spring High School Girls’ Self Defense class. They are also responsible for the Citizen’s Emergency Response Team (CERT), conduct neighborhood Community and Police Partnership (CAPP) groups throughout the community, and have created several “Coffee with a Cop” mornings in local establishments, as well as assisted with “Thank a Cop Day” at a local restaurant. They have successfully implemented the Drug Drop-off and Disposal Program. They investigate property crime victim follow-ups, including security assessments of resident's homes and businesses. These officers implemented a Town of Greenwich Employee Response to Active Shooter Program. They also oversee a Boy Scout Police Explorer program that runs a very active Law Enforcement Career interest Explorer Post.
Through their tireless efforts, a strong bond has been created with Greenwich Police Department and the community.
City of Groton Police DepartmentOfficer Patricia Lieteau
Officer Lieteau is a veteran officer not only of this agency, but in a previous career retiring as a New London Police Sergeant. Where many would retire and do far less, Officer Lieteau draws on her experience and her ability seeking to always do more. She embodies the spirit and commitment of the community policing model in her daily comportment and interaction with the public, and casts a strong presence in the City of Groton. She is often sought by our community stakeholders as a mediator, confidant and a trusted voice of reason. A product of New London High School and always active in her community locally, her opinion is often sought regionally.
Officer Lieteau, by her integrity, ability and caring, has the unique ability to engage all our community’s diverse demographics in her always professional and effective manner. Her recent work in the City of Groton with a Police Cadet initiative has been exemplary. Working off duty and on her own time, she has worked with local youth and engaged them. She has presented this agency to this group of local youth as caring and devoted to this community, she has built strong bridges to our local youth involved here and ensured trust and ultimately respect is produced. The effect she has had is palpable and she has filled a void with structure, positive encouragement and caring. She is truly beloved by these cadets. She even at her own expense purchased radios for the group and had them assigned where they served with distinction recently addressing parking at the heavily attended City of Groton Day event. Her day to day efforts are deeply respected and appreciated, she always makes a difference. Her efforts to develop and create a Groton City Police Cadet Program are in the highest traditions of not only the City of Groton Police Department but of the concept of community service, community engagement and community policing.
New Canaan Police DepartmentOfficer Jeffrey Deak
Officer Jeffery Deak has been a member of the New Canaan Police Department since 1995. He serves the School Resource Officers at our Middle School and is one of our firearms instructors. He is a great example of how effective one officer can be in a community while interacting with its youth.
Officer Deak has developed tremendous ties and relationships with students and staff. He makes safety presentations, interacts daily with students in the schools, and is a 24/7 resource for New Canaan’s youth and families.
In addition to his school based interactions, Officer Deak has selflessly volunteered his time for many years at police sponsored functions and events such as visiting sick children as Santa Clause at local hospitals and at the department’s Children’s Christmas party. Officer Deak is an exemplary Police Officer and the New Canaan Police Department is proud to have him among the rank and file.
New Haven Police DepartmentLieutenant Karl JacobsonLieutenant Maneet Colon
On October 4, 2017, the New Haven Police Department and the U.S. Attorney’s Office partnered together for the 2nd Annual Cops & Ballers, 3 on 3 basketball tournament with members of the community. Last year it was part of National Community Policing Week and due to the overwhelming response, it was repeated again this year. The local police were provided an opportunity to engage with residents in a way that broke traditional forms of dialogue in favor of competitive fun on the courts. It was the latest attempt at community outreach from a law enforcement community eager to build both familiarity and trust among the population it serves.
To organize the troops from the police department and the community was no easy feat, but the task was undertaken by Lieutenant Maneet Colon, the Westville/West Hills District Manager and Lieutenant Karl Jacobson, the Officer in Charge of the Criminal Intelligence Unit. Both stepped up to take responsibility of forming teams, ordering t-shirts, seeking out a referee and equipment, as well as preparing the Goffe Street Park for some serious half-court tournament competition. There are many fine details that go into a large event comprised of multiple teams, playing on the courts, but the games went off smoothly and a good time was had by all. Lt. Jacobson even participated in some of the games, while Lt. Colon kept score and encouraged the players.
Norwich Police DepartmentLieutenant John Perry
Lieutenant John Perry is a 15-year member of the Norwich Police Department and has led the Norwich Police Community Policing Unit since 2016. In the area of community relations Lt. Perry’s actions were truly exceptional. Lt. Perry would work hand-in-hand with community and faith based organizations to jointly sponsor community forums and events that were all highly successful. Lt. Perry became the “face” of the Norwich Police Department and there was not one community event that did not have NPD CPU involvement.
Lt. Perry also partnered with Norwich Mayor Hinchey to do business visits with the Norwich businesses. These visits allowed Lt. Perry to act as an ambassador for the Norwich Police Department while learning the needs and challenges Norwich businesses face. Lt. Perry was able, using community policing problem solving skills, to address and, in most cases, solve the issues making Norwich an attractive community to do business in.
In May 2017, Lt. Perry was recognized by the Norwich Branch NAACP for his efforts and was awarded the Robertsine Duncan Youth Council Community Service Award. Lt. Perry is also very active as a volunteer in the Norwich community where he resides. Lt. Perry serves as a volunteer basketball and soccer coach for the Norwich PAL.
Torrington Police DepartmentChief Michael ManiagoDeputy Chief Chris SmedickOfficer Antony PietrafesaOfficer Robert Simon
The Torrington Police Department Community Policing philosophy is based upon a partnership between the police and the community whereby we share responsibility for identifying, reducing, eliminating and preventing problems that impact community safety. By working together, the police and the community can reduce the fear and incidence of crime and improve the quality of life in neighborhoods citywide.
Our Community Policing Officers recently opened a Downtown Police Outreach Center where they offer educational opportunities for school children, seniors, and local corporations. From this location, they also respond to the needs of our Downtown Business District. Active shooter training for schools and businesses, stay safe presentations, block watch meetings, DARE, Park, Walk and Talk Patrols represent a fraction of their activities. Torrington’s Community Policing Officers play active roles in organizing and participating in local efforts to reduce homelessness, plan and hold food drives and toy drives, just to name a few.
The Torrington Police Department holds to the philosophy of “the most effective way to reach the community is through collaboration with our local partners.” Some of these partners include the United Way, Chamber of Commerce, the Parks and Recreation department, our local Soup Kitchen, and the Latina Woman's Association. Their officers have expanded their Police Activities League (PAL). They currently service close to 800 children from kindergarten to the 12th grade by sponsoring and operating sports programs, day camps, and the arts; twelve months a year.
For Community Policing to take hold in a community, the work must be a department wide philosophy, from the Chief all the way down to the newest officer or civilian clerk.
Trumbull Police DepartmentOfficer Timothy Fedor
Officer Timothy Fedor has distinguished himself through exemplary contributions to community policing and improving the relationship between police and the community.
Officer Timothy Fedor has been a member of the Trumbull Police Department since 2001. During his tenure as a Trumbull police officer he has been a School Resource Officer and currently serves as our Training Officer. As the sole Training Officer for the Department of 81 sworn police officers, Officer Fedor is responsible for all recruit officers and their certifications and the constant recertification of the entire Department.
Most importantly, Officer Fedor still contributes to the community more than any other officer of this Department. He trains residents in medical procedures when they become volunteers at the EMS center. He is and has been an integral part of the Trumbull Partnership Against Under Age Drinking, TPAUD, since its inception, more than 11 years ago. He works with its members to train our officers in "Party Patrol" techniques and in the usage of Narcan as First Responders. Officer Fedor has also participated in public training of Narcan deployment to residents through the TPAUD organization.
Officer Fedor coordinates Coffee with a Cop events in Trumbull, which have become important to our agency to meet residents and their children in local coffee shops. It is a “no agenda” listening and getting to know one another outside the role of a police officer.
Officer Fedor is the Advisor of our Department's Police Cadet Program. The Cadet program involves local students from ages 14 through 22 that have an interest in law enforcement. Officer Fedor meets weekly with the Cadets and instructs them in law enforcement practices. The Cadets, through Officer Fedor, sponsor a Toys for Tots donation drive during the Christmas Season; the annual Freshman Forum at the Trumbull High School; Shop a Mile in Her Shoes, an event held annually at the Trumbull Mall to raise awareness of domestic violence; the annual Domestic Violence Vigil held in Trumbull; the 9/11 ride through Trumbull held each year, and the two-day Fall Festival event.
Officer Fedor is the epitome of what a community police officer is. He is always willing to take on more duties and responsibilities and is professional in all of his interactions with residents and community members. Officer Fedor has without question single-handedly raised the bar of community policing. He has made Trumbull a safer and better place to live and raise a family.
University of Connecticut Police DepartmentLieutenant Jason Hyland
Lieutenant Jason Hyland has served in law enforcement for 20 years and has been part of the UConn Police Department for 17 years. He is described by his supervisors as a proactive and innovative person who is genuinely interested in helping the community. Lieutenant Hyland was assigned to the Community Outreach Unit in 2015 and has taken the initiative to enhance the relationship between police and the UConn community with new and innovative programming.
Using student focus groups, he has developed successful safety campaigns branded under Bright Futures. Bright Futures campaigns are geared toward engaging UCPD officers with the community while working hand-in-hand to identify public safety concerns, provide education, and host community events. The campaign’s goal is to realize practical and effective solutions to the issues facing our neighborhoods. One of the most notable campaigns is Bright Future: Alcohol or Other Drug Safety. Since the release of this campaign in 2016, there have been hundreds of presentations and events for students.
Lieutenant Hyland also has a special interest in promoting understanding of mental health issues and people with developmental disabilities and was instrumental in the creation of the UConn Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) Program. CIT is a nationwide, innovative model community initiative and has been implemented at UConn with all the officers. Lieutenant Hyland’s dedication and love for the UConn Community has brought the UConn Police Department’s community relations from good and positive to outstanding.
Lieutenant Hyland has received many awards from the Department as well as our community for his efforts. Most recently, Lieutenant Hyland received the Gerald N. Weller Award from the UConn Division of Student Affairs. The Weller Award recognizes individuals in the UConn Community, beyond the Division of Student Affairs, who serve students and support the efforts of the Division in the true spirit exemplified by Gerald Weller.
West Hartford Police DepartmentOfficer Dante Ursini
Officer Ursini has been a police officer for 10 years and a School Resource Officer in the Community Relations Division for the past 2 years. He is currently pursuing his Master’s Degree in Social Work.
Officer Ursini is a pleasure to work with and we have frequently fielded compliments and accolades for the exceptional way he has handled calls, especially those involving children with special needs. Officer Ursini has worked, for many years now, with a student whose family has many legal, financial and mental challenges. Officer Ursini has met with the child on a regular basis, has incorporated other resources, and has worked with the school system in an effort to show this child that there are people who care for him. Officer Ursini sees the promise this child holds and continues to provide full support to the family. This is but one instance of the many “above and beyond” cases he works on in our schools.
In 2017, Officer Ursini developed a “Care Card” program while working with the Board of Education. The Care Card identification program issues cards to residents for a variety of purposes, including – but not limited to – those with cognitive impairments, specifically special needs students and the elderly. Those with special needs may not have the ability to recall personal information, or may not be able to obtain another form of ID, and can be issued a Care Card. This photo ID card is linked to the police database and is completely customizable based on the patient’s privacy concerns. The card enables people to be quickly identified by police as having an impairment. It contains emergency contact and hospital information, also. The goal is to help officers quickly reunite these patients with their loved ones or to connect them with proper care. The program has gained positive media attention and is very popular with senior citizens centers, convalescent homes and has been shared with local Autism centers.
Officer Ursini regularly presents to a variety of groups on a host of topics including teen driving, internet safety, drug awareness, law enforcement & the elderly – to name only a few.
Officer Ursini works tirelessly in order to keep West Hartford residents safe.
Westport Police DepartmentOfficer Ned Batlin
Officer Batlin has continuously worked to improve the relationship between the police and the community over his 16-year career.
Officer Batlin is a member of the Westport Youth Commission, which is a panel of students and adults from the community that report directly to our first selectman. He was instrumental in creating this Commission, and has worked with this group for years. They have created multiple events to bring cops and kids together in a positive environment. After the Commission’s success, Officer Batlin pioneered the Westport Police Youth Collaborative. This is a club for high school students and officers to work together on community service projects, team building and some instructional information about the job of law enforcement. This past spring he was the program coordinator for our first ever Police Youth Citizens Academy. He has also been an instrumental member of our Community Policing Panel.
Officer Batlin is the first patrol officer to be named President of the Police Athletic League in Westport. Westport P.A.L. provides multiple organized sports for boys and girls as well as host of other community based programs. Officer Batlin is also a football and lacrosse coach at the youth and high school level while balancing his law enforcement career. This has made him a valuable and trusted member of the community. He makes himself available to numerous groups annually as a guest speaker on a variety of subjects ranging from “Risky Behavior” panels, to talking with local scouting groups. He organizes guest speakers to speak with the public on a wide range of topics including domestic violence, underage drinking, and heroin addiction. Officer Batlin partnered with Staples High School’s “Teen Awareness Group and Positive Directions” to place a full time Drug Take Back Box in the Police Department lobby. He also sits on the Norwalk / Westport Juvenile Review Board and has been there since its inception.
Most importantly, Officer Batlin has forged many strong, positive relationships in the community from the programs listed here, as well as his many years on patrol.
Willimantic Police DepartmentCorporal Joshua Clark
Corporal Joshua Clark started his career with the Willimantic Police Department in 2007. Cpl. Clark currently serves as a supervisor on the Day Shift Patrol and serves as a member the Willimantic Police Department SWAT team. Cpl. Clark was born and raised in Willimantic and cares deeply for the Willimantic Community. During the past few years Cpl. Clark has been involved in numerous community events. Most of these events revolve around the youth of the community.
Cpl. Clark has been a key member of the Windham PRIDE (Prevention to reduce the influence of drugs for everyone) Coalition and has helped organize several week-long youth leadership academies. These academies have helped bridge a gap between the city’s youth and the Willimantic Police Department.
Cpl. Clark also administers the Windham PRIDE Facebook page highlighting not only the Police Department’s involvement in the community, but also the children’s involvement within the community. His expertise with social media has created a connection between the public and the Willimantic Police Department and has shown the public so many of the great things happening in Willimantic.
Cpl. Clark has tirelessly helped organize several Christmas toy drives that resulted in numerous truckloads of toys that were handed out to the community. He has also been involved in organizing back to school events where backpacks and sneakers were given to the children. Whether he is helping with a bicycle giveaway throughout the Willimantic Schools or Halloween safety events, Cpl. Clark is there working to help the children of the community.
When there is any type of charitable event in the city of Willimantic, Cpl. Clark is always there willing to volunteer his time. His effort does not go unnoticed. During community events, the children flock to him because of their connection to him and his outgoing personality.
Before becoming a Police officer, Cpl. Clark was in the U.S. Army and at one point served in Iraq. While in Iraq he was injured and received the Purple Heart.
Case Name: United States v. COMPUTER SERVERS AND RECORDS OF YAHOO! INCORPORATED FOR INFORMATION ASSOCIATED WITH THE E-MAIL ACCOUNT, LIEU.SINGER@YAHOO.COM
Joseph and Lisa Burgess, the last of seven defendants, will each spend hundreds of months behind bars and forfeited their house as well as over $20K in seized cash.
LANSING, MI – United States Attorney Andrew Birge announced that Joseph and Lisa Burgess of Dewitt, Michigan were sentenced today for their role in a conspiracy to distribute crystal methamphetamine. They were the last of the seven defendants charged in the conspiracy to receive their sentences.
The Hon. Hala Jarbou, the U.S. District Court Judge in Lansing, sentenced Lisa Burgess, age 48, to 235 months in prison (over 19 years) for conspiring to distribute and possess with the intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine. Joseph Burgess, also known as “Diamond,” age 50, was sentenced to 352 months in prison (over 29 years) for conspiracy to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine, possession with the intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine, and possession of firearms in furtherance of drug trafficking. Each defendant will have to pay fines and special assessments and will spend three years on supervised release when released from the Bureau of Prisons. Their house and over $20,000 in cash were also forfeited.
In January 2020, law enforcement officers from the Michigan State Police Department’s Tri-County Metro Narcotics Team and the Drug Enforcement Administration executed a search warrant at the Burgess residence and seized over three pounds of crystal methamphetamine, 15 handguns, 33 long guns, over $20,000, and drug trafficking paraphernalia (rubber gloves, digital scales, and baggies). The investigation showed that Joseph and Lisa Burgess and their codefendants trafficked crystal meth in the Lansing area and the Upper Peninsula.
“Crystal methamphetamine continues to have a devastating impact in our communities in both the Upper and Lower Peninsulas,” said U.S. Attorney Andrew Birge. “My office treats drug trafficking very seriously, particularly when the danger is increased by offenders possessing firearms.”
“These seven individuals were part of a drug trafficking organization that pushed poisonous methamphetamine into mid-Michigan and the upper peninsula in exchange for money,” added Acting Special Agent in Charge Kent Kleinschmidt of the DEA Detroit Field Division. “DEA, and our law enforcement partners, will employ every resource at our disposal to bring drug pushers to justice and stop the flow of illegal drugs into our communities.”
“Tri-County Metro Narcotics appreciates the collaborative efforts of our local and federal partners,” said Michigan State Police Tri-County Metro Narcotics Team Commander Detective Lieutenant Bill Eberhart. “This investigation and subsequent sentencing demonstrates our continuing commitment to pursue drug dealers who are inflicting harm upon the communities and citizens we serve. Tri-County Metro Narcotics will continue to work vigorously to disrupt and dismantle those illicit organizations and endeavor to keep our citizens and communities safe.”
The Burgesses were the last members of the conspiracy to be sentenced. The other defendants received the following sentences:
Garylee Dexter, a/k/a “Flip”—108 months in prison for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine;
Ryan Timko—172 months in prison for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine;
Jeremy Brusso—132 months in prison for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine;
Nicholas Cornish—120 months in prison for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine; and
Kendra Stidolph—45 months in prison for possession with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine.
The Michigan State Police Tri-County Metro Narcotics Team and Drug Enforcement Administration investigated the case. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Alexis Sanford, Ted Greeley, and Erin Lane prosecuted the case.
ANCHORAGE, Alaska – The leader of an extensive transnational drug trafficking organization was sentenced to 28 years in prison on Wednesday for running a conspiracy that trafficked vast amounts of dangerous drugs to Alaska.
According to court documents, Miguel Baez Guevara, a.k.a. “Javi,” 41, a U.S. citizen who was living in Mexico, was the leader of a transnational criminal drug trafficking organization. In October 2014 Guevara was indicted by the State of Arizona for drug trafficking, money laundering and weapons offenses. Guevara fled to Mexico where he headed an enterprise that trafficked large quantities of heroin, methamphetamine and cocaine into the U.S., specifically targeting Alaska, from Mexico. Guevara claimed membership in, and association with, the Sinaloa Cartel.
Guevara’s organization recruited drug couriers who lived in Alaska by using fake personas on social media and encrypted messaging applications. The couriers were promised money or drugs in exchange for traveling to Mexico to collect narcotics for transport back to Alaska. Couriers would travel in small groups led by a team leader and would typically smuggle around 250 grams of drugs on each trip. Guevara gave them instructions on how to smuggle the drugs back to Alaska, where they were met by a member of Guevara’s organization who paid them and collected the drugs for local distribution.
Guevara used violence, threats of violence, and his affiliation with the Sinaloa Cartel to intimidate and maintain total control of his organization. He required drug couriers to submit photos of their driver’s license and maintained records of each worker in his organization. He threatened to have houses burned down in Alaska and on one occasion had a U.S. citizen from Alaska shot in the knee over a drug dispute when they traveled to Mexico. He later bragged he was responsible for the shooting, showed photos and ultimately warned others what could happen if they stole drugs or money from him.
Guevara conducted all these operations from Mexico. The defendant was expelled from Mexico to the U.S. in September 2021 after a federal grand jury in Alaska charged him on a 17 count indictment and he was subsequently arrested by Mexican authorities. Between 2016 and 2022, at least 30 other couriers and dealers working for the defendant were federally prosecuted for participating in Guevara’s drug trafficking organization.
In total, law enforcement seized 7.1 kilograms of meth, nearly 10 kilograms of heroin and 900 grams of cocaine destined for Alaska linked to Guevara’s enterprise. His enterprise grossed millions of dollars in drug sales during the course of the conspiracy. Those proceeds were smuggled to Mexico.
The defendant pleaded guilty to one count of continuing criminal enterprise and one count of drug conspiracy on Jan. 17, 2024, in front of U.S. District Court Chief Magistrate Judge Matthew M. Scoble.
The Continuing Criminal Enterprise statute 21 U.S.C. § 848 is often referred to as the “Kingpin Statute.” The statute is designed to reach the top brass in drug trafficking organizations, and not the lieutenants and foot soldiers. The statute was enacted to target large-scale profit-making enterprises engaged in the illegal importation, manufacture and distribution of controlled substances.
Three other defendants in this case have already been sentenced:
Joel Rascone, 30, pleaded guilty to drug conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute heroin and was sentenced to 120 months’ imprisonment.
Serena Joseph, 41, pleaded guilty to drug conspiracy and money laundering and was sentenced to 63 months’ imprisonment.
Washahiotha Zaragoza, 46, pleaded guilty to drug conspiracy and was sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment.
Four additional co-defendants are believed to be at large in Mexico.
“I want to thank the FBI, DEA, the Coast Guard Investigative Service and all other supporting law enforcement agencies who helped bring justice in this case,” said U.S. Attorney S. Lane Tucker for the District of Alaska. “Keeping our communities safe from violent drug traffickers is a priority for the U.S. Attorney’s Office. To those looking to greedily profit by trafficking dangerous drugs to Alaska—our office, alongside our law enforcement partners, will use the full force of our resources to investigate and prosecute you to the furthest extent of the law.”
“Mr. Guevara is responsible for trafficking substantial amounts of dangerous drugs into Alaska from Mexico, while preying and profiting on the addictions of others,” said Special Agent in Charge Rebecca Day of the FBI Anchorage Field Office. “The FBI, together with our law enforcement partners, will continue to identify, disrupt, and dismantle transnational criminal organizations that threaten the safety and security of our communities in Alaska.”
“DEA is committed to protecting Alaskans from violent drug traffickers who prey on our communities,” said David F. Reames, Special Agent in Charge, DEA Seattle Field Division. “Mr. Guevara ran a drug trafficking organization that used violence to spread the misery of drugs throughout Alaska for his own enrichment. I am proud of DEA’s role, alongside our partners in the FBI, the Coast Guard Investigative Service, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office, in stopping him.”
“The Coast Guard Investigative Service is committed to safeguarding the lives of those who live and work in maritime communities. We thank our law enforcement partners for their steadfast efforts in removing this threat to the lives of our Alaskan neighbors,” said Special Agent in Charge Paul Shultz of the Coast Guard Investigative Service Northwest Field Office.
The FBI Anchorage Field Office, U.S. Coast Guard Investigative Service (CGIS) and the Drug Enforcement Administration Seattle Field Office led the investigation, with support from the Anchorage Police Department, Homeland Security Investigations Sells, Arizona Office, U.S. Customs and Border Patrol, Alaska State Troopers, Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport Police and Alaska National Guard.
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Ainsley McNerney, Chris Schroeder and William Taylor are prosecuting the case, with assistance from former Assistant U.S. Attorney Allison O’Leary. The U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Arizona, and law enforcement agencies in the state of Arizona provided additional support on the case.
This investigation and prosecution are part of the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (“OCDETF”), which identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level drug traffickers, money launderers, gangs, and transnational criminal organizations that threaten the United States by using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach that leverages the strengths of federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies against criminal networks.
ANCHORAGE – Miguel Baez Guevara, 38, a United States citizen living in Mexico, was indicted by a federal grand jury on 17 counts related to his leadership role in trafficking narcotics directly from Mexico to Alaska. Guevara was arrested by Mexican immigration authorities from the Instituto Nacional de Migración in Sonora, Mexico, on Friday, September 10, and deported to the United States. U.S. Law Enforcement arrested Guevara upon his arrival in Arizona. He pleaded not guilty Tuesday in federal court in Phoenix, Arizona. He will remain detained pending his transfer to Alaska.
According to the recently unsealed indictment, beginning in 2016 Guevara’s organization operated to import heroin, methamphetamine, and cocaine directly from Mexico to Alaska. Guevara claimed membership in, and association with, the Sinaloa Cartel. Guevara’s network specifically targeted Alaska because they received higher profits for the illegal drugs due to Alaska’s significant distance from the Mexican sources of supply.
Using social media and encrypted messaging applications, Guevara’s network recruited drug couriers who lived in Alaska. The couriers were promised money or drugs in exchange for traveling to Mexico to collect the narcotics for transport back to Alaska. Couriers were required to submit photos of their driver’s license and other personal information. Guevara made it known he was associated with the Sinaloa Cartel and there were serious and violent repercussions for couriers who stole narcotics or provided information to law enforcement. The couriers often traveled in small groups with an assigned team leader. Couriers typically carried about 250 grams of narcotics on each trip. Once the couriers arrived in Alaska a member of Guevara’s network, who was stationed in Alaska, paid them and collected the narcotics. Street level dealers in Alaska contacted Guevara who coordinated the sale between his Alaska workers and the local dealer. Guevara did not cross into the United States due to outstanding federal and state arrest warrants but conducted all operations from Mexico.
The Continuing Criminal Enterprise statute 21 U.S.C. § 848 is often referred to as the “Kingpin Statute.” The statute is designed to reach the top brass in drug trafficking organizations, and not the lieutenants and foot soldiers. The statute was enacted to target large-scale profit-making enterprises engaged in the illegal importation, manufacture and distribution of controlled substances. A conviction carries a mandatory life sentence.
The indictment and arrest are part of an ongoing, large scale drug trafficking investigation dubbed “Operation Albondiga” which has resulted in the arrest and criminal charges of 23 individuals since 2016.
The defendants (in alphabetical order) are as follows:
Jason Alto, 25, pleaded guilty to Possession with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, sentenced January 18, 2017 to 20 months imprisonment.
Chinaya Begay, 26, pleaded guilty to Possession with Intent to Distribute a Controlled Substance, sentenced August 12, 2021 to time served (13 months).
Mario Burgueno, 36, pleaded guilty in the District of Arizona to Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Heroin, sentenced June 12, 2019 to 120 months imprisonment.
Dana Dwyer, 45, pleaded guilty to Felon in Possession of Firearms, sentencing scheduled for January 10, 2022.
Travon Grays, 28, pleaded guilty to Conspiracy to Distribute Controlled Substances, sentenced March 2, 2021 to 37 months imprisonment.
Jessica Hannah, 26, pleaded guilty to Attempted Possession with Intent to Distribute Controlled Substances, sentenced June 7, 2021 to time served (7 months).
Zanders Herndon, 39, pleaded guilty to Felon in Possession of Firearm and Ammunition, sentenced August 6, 2018 to 54 months imprisonment.
Eva Houser, 38, pleaded guilty to Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute Controlled Substances, sentenced January 3, 2019 to 36 months imprisonment.
David Garcia Johnson, 29, pleaded guilty to Distribution of a Controlled Substance, sentenced January 11, 2021 to 46 months imprisonment.
April Krause, 36, pleaded guilty in the District of Arizona to Conspiracy to Possess Counterfeit Obligations and Sureties of the United States and Bringing in Counterfeit Obligations, sentenced October 18, 2018 to 13 months imprisonment.
Katrina Lundy, 41, pleaded guilty to Attempted Possession with Intent to Distribute Controlled Substances, sentenced March 6, 2019 to 21 months imprisonment.
Jarese Martinez, 28, pleaded guilty to Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute Controlled Substances, sentenced November 2, 2018 to 120 months imprisonment.
Victor Mizugay-Gallego, 24, pleaded guilty to Attempted Possession of a Controlled Substance with Intent to Distribute, sentencing scheduled for October 6, 2021.
Alicia Norvell, 33, pleaded guilty to Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute Controlled Substances, sentenced September 12, 2018 to time served (10 months).
Mykki Orth, 55, pleaded guilty to Distribution of Controlled Substances, sentenced October 23, 2018 to 15 months imprisonment.
Frances Pelch, 66, pleaded guilty to Attempted Possession with Intent to Distribute Controlled Substances, sentenced January 15, 2021 to 36 months imprisonment.
Alicia Pierce, 27, pleaded guilty in the District of Arizona to Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Heroin, sentenced May 23, 2019 to time served (10 months).
Jackie Polzel, 34, pleaded guilty to Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute Controlled Substances, sentenced September 12, 2018 to 36 months imprisonment.
Kelly Pretty, 35, pleaded guilty to Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute Controlled Substances, sentenced May 2, 2018 to 16 months imprisonment.
Jody Schuyler, 55, pleaded guilty in the District of Arizona to Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Heroin, sentenced May 21, 2019 to 12 months imprisonment.
Audriel Soto, 25, pleaded guilty to Possession with Intent to Distribute a Controlled Substance, sentenced February 17, 2021 to 36 months imprisonment.
Nicole Villa, 33, pleaded guilty in the District of Arizona to Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Heroin, sentenced April 3, 2019 to time served (10 months).
Casey Wells, 39, pleaded guilty in the District of Arizona to Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Heroin, sentenced April 2, 2019 to time served (10 months).
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the U.S. Coast Guard Investigative Service (CGIS) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) are leading the investigation with investigative support provided by Anchorage Police Department (APD), Homeland Security Investigations Sells, Arizona, Office (HSI), U.S. Customs & Border Patrol, the Alaska State Troopers (AST), Ted Stevens International Airport Police and the Alaska National Guard. We also want to thank the U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Arizona and law enforcement agencies in the State of Arizona for their invaluable help with this case and “Operation Albondiga.”
Assistant U.S. Attorneys William Taylor, Allison O’Leary, and Chris Schroeder are prosecuting the case.
Operation Albondiga is part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) investigation. OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level drug traffickers, money launderers, gangs, and transnational criminal organizations that threaten the United States by using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach that leverages the strengths of federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies against criminal networks.
An indictment is merely an allegation and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
McALLEN, Texas – A 23-year-old man has been sentenced for drug trafficking, announced U.S. Attorney Alamdar S. Hamdani.
Jesse James Gonzalez pleaded guilty Sept. 27, 2023.
U.S. District Judge Micaela Alvarez has now ordered Gonzalez to serve 120 months in federal prison to be immediately followed by five years of supervised release. At the hearing, the court heard additional information about how Gonzalez’s criminal history was repetitive and warranted a lengthy sentence. In handing down the sentence, the court noted the societal harms of trafficking in narcotics and the destruction in communities that it occurs.
On Nov. 29, 2022, Gonzalez attempted to make entry into the United States through the Donna Port of Entry. Gonzalez was carrying a shoebox containing two packages of white crystal meth.
Authorities discovered the meth during the inspection process and Gonzalez subsequently admitted he had “ice” in the shoebox.
Homeland Security Investigations and Customs and Border Protection conducted the investigation with the assistance of the Drug Enforcement Administration.
Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA) Devin V. Walker prosecuted the case. AUSA Ted Parran handled the sentencing hearing.
HOUSTON – A federal grand jury has indicted a 43-year-old Houston man on four counts of firearms violations including possession of a machine gun, specifically, a bump stock, announced U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick.
The four-count indictment, returned yesterday, alleges Ajay Dhingra possessed a machine gun, made two materially false statements in the acquisition of two firearms and unlawfully possessed a firearm after having been adjudicated as a mental defective or who had been committed to a mental institution.
Previously charged by criminal complaint, he made his initial appearance in federal court Aug., 19, 2019, at which time he was ordered into custody pending further criminal proceedings. He is expected to appear for his arraignment before U.S. District Judge Gray Miller Sept. 12, 2019, at 10:00 a.m.
According to court records, on or about Aug. 17, 2019, Dhingra called the George Bush Foundation and left a concerning message. Authorities discovered Dhingra had previously been committed to a mental institution, according to the allegations. As such, he is prohibited by federal law of possessing a firearm or ammunition.
The charges further allege law enforcement contacted Dhingra at his residence where they found two firearms in his possession, one of which law enforcement identified as a rifle with an installed bump stock.
Authorities obtained a search warrant, which allegedly resulted in the discovery of a Glock pistol, a Colt rifle with a bump stock and 277 rounds of 9 mm ammunition.
According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), this is the first case filed in Texas and what is believed to be the first nationwide involving illegal possession of bump stocks since the law was implemented in March 2019.
If convicted of any of the charges, Dhingra faces up to 10 years in federal prison and a possible $250,000 fine.
The Secret Service and ATF conducted the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Ted Imperato and Steven Schammel are prosecuting the case.
An indictment is a formal accusation of criminal conduct, not evidence.A defendant is presumed innocent unless convicted through due process of law.
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
HOUSTON – A 46-year-old resident of Houston has been ordered to federal prison for his conviction of trafficking nearly six kilograms of methamphetamine, announced U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick. Marco Antonio Aparicio-Santos pleaded guilty Aug. 12, 2016.
Today, Senior U.S. District Judge David Hittner sentenced Ortiz-Flores to 210 months in federal prison to be immediately followed by five years of supervised release.
At the time of his plea, Aparicio-Santos admitted to playing a key role in attempting to deliver methamphetamine in the Houston area.
On June 13, 2014, a confidential source mistakenly received several bundles which contained approximately six kilograms of methamphetamine from two unknown male couriers working with him. The couriers had approached the source and mistakenly threw a bag in his car containing six bundles of methamphetamine. The source quickly realized the bundles contained drugs and contacted federal agents who advised him to contact a co-defendant Jesus Ortiz-Flores. At that time, Ortiz-Flores advised him that drugs were supposed to go to Aparicio-Santos who was then supposed to divide it up and provide to others.
Ortiz-Flores told the source he could just sell the some of the drugs himself. The source later told Ortiz-Flores he “sold” two kilograms of methamphetamine. Upon the direction of Ortiz-Flores, the source then delivered the remaining four kilograms to Aparicio-Santos for him to sell. The drugs were hidden inside a spare tire and delivered as instructed.
Officers then conducted a traffic stop on a vehicle Aparicio-Santos was driving and seized the methamphetamine. All six of the bundles of methamphetamine were subsequently sent for further analysis, which demonstrated the drugs had a net weight of 5.924 kilograms and were 100% pure.
The drugs had been imported from Mexico.
The evidence in the case also revealed Aparicio-Santos was involved in other methamphetamine trafficking transactions totaling more than 11 kilograms for which he was also held accountable at the hearing today.
He will remain in custody pending transfer to a U.S. Bureau of Prisons facility to be determined in the near future.
Ortiz-Flores was also convicted and later sentenced to 25 years in federal prison.
The Drug Enforcement Administration, Houston Police Department and Harris County Sheriff’s Office conducted the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Arthur R. Jones and Ted Imperato are prosecuting the case.
McALLEN, Texas – Two Starr County residents, one a former justice of the peace (JP), are now headed to federal prison for their roles in a drug-trafficking organization, announced U.S. Attorney Alamdar S. Hamdani.
Roel Valadez Jr., 33, and Diego Alberto Reyes-Roiz, 43, both of Rio Grande City, pleaded guilty March 18 and March 25, respectively.
Chief U.S. District Judge Randy Crane has now ordered Reyes-Roiz to serve a total of 22 years in prison, while former JP Valadez must serve 21 months. Reyes-Roiz must also serve five years of supervised release following release from prison. Valadez will be on supervised release for three years.
In handing down the sentence, Judge Crane found Reyes-Roiz was the leader of a drug-trafficking organization that imported substantial quantities of drugs into the United States from Mexico which was then distributed throughout Texas. Reyes-Roiz was found responsible for the importation of approximately 43 kilograms of meth from Mexico into the United States in addition to large amounts of cocaine and marijuana.
The Court learned about how Valdez had been doing favors for Ignacio Garza - one of the heads of the drug trafficking organization. Garza had received information that authorities had stopped and apprehended one of his drug couriers. Valadez, a JP since 2018, made a series of phone calls to the Starr County jail to see if the courier had been booked, and if so, by whom and reached out to another Justice of the Peace to see if he could be released on his own recognizance.
“As an elected official in Starr County, a judge none the less, Valadez swore an oath to uphold the law,” said Hamdani. “However, he betrayed his oath of office and the citizens of Starr County when he abused his office to assist and protect a local drug-trafficking organization.”
At the time of his plea, Valadez admitted he had possessed with intent to distribute less than 100 kilograms of marijuana. He also acknowledged he had used his JP position to assist another person in obtaining a low bond for one of his workers that law enforcement had detained.
Reyes-Roiz will remain in custody pending transfer to a U.S. Bureau of Prisons facility to be determined in the near future. Valadez was permitted to remain on bond and voluntarily surrender at a later date.
Garza, 53, Rio Grande City, also pleaded guilty and is set for sentencing Sept. 5. At that time, he faces up to life in federal prison as well as a possible $10 million fine. He remains in custody.
The Drug Enforcement Administration, FBI, Homeland Security Investigations and IRS Criminal Investigations conducted the Organized Crime and Dug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) investigations with the assistance of local task force officers. OCDETF identifies, disrupts and dismantles the highest-level drug traffickers, money launderers, gangs and transnational criminal organizations that threaten the United States by using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach that leverages the strengths of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies against criminal networks. Additional information about the OCDETF Program can be found on the Department of Justice’s OCDETF webpage. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Patricia Cook Profit and Ted Parran prosecuted the cases.
HOUSTON – A 55-year-old resident of Sugar Land has been ordered to federal prison for sending a threatening email to the Texas Attorney General’s Office (TXAG) and various employees with other state agencies, announced U.S. Attorney Kenneth Magidson. Syed Kaleem Razvi pleaded guilty Oct. 3, 2016.
Today U.S. District Judge Vanessa Gilmore sentenced Razvi to 24 months in federal prison immediately followed by two years of supervised release.
Razvi sent an email communication on June 8, 2015, to the Texas Attorney General’s Office, Child Support Division, as well as various employees with other Texas agencies. The subject line of the email said “Tell Atty General of Texas this.” The email threatened the Attorney General of Texas, as well as all those emailed that Razvi would “get up in arms against you all,” and that he wished “God burn your houses and burn the bodies of your own children and yourself.” The email also demanded that the Attorney General of Texas return his money or “FACE TERRORISM.”
Razvi will remain in custody pending transfer to a U.S. Bureau of Prisons facility to be determined in the near future.
The FBI conducted the investigation in conjunction with the Texas Attorney General’s Office - Criminal Investigations Division. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Ted Imperato, Alamdar Hamdani and Andrew Leuchtmann prosecuted the case.
HOUSTON – A federal indictment has been unsealed against a 44-year-old woman for making false statements to federal authorities, announced U.S. Attorney Ryan Patrick.
A Houston federal grand jury returned the two-count indictment against Summer Worden, of Wichita, Kansas, Feb. 27. She is expected to make her initial appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Dena H. Palermo April 13.
The charges allege Worden made false statements to NASA - Office of Inspector General (OIG) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
According to the indictment, Worden maintained multiple bank accounts at USAA Federal Savings Bank. She allegedly shared access to her online accounts with a commissioned officer in the U.S. Army on detail to NASA’s Johnson Space Center who had access until at least Jan. 31, 2019.
The indictment alleges Worden filed a complaint with the FTC, alleging the officer had improperly accessed her bank account. She claimed she had opened a new account in September 2018 and reset her login credentials in order to prevent the individual from accessing her accounts, according to the charges. However, the indictment alleges she actually opened the account in April 2018 and did not change her login credentials until January 2019.
The indictment charges Worden with making false statements on two occasions. She allegedly filed the false complaint March 19, 2019, with the FTC and later made a false statement in an interview with NASA-OIG July 22, 2019.
If convicted, Worden faces up to five years in prison on each count and a possible $250,000 maximum fine.
NASA-OIG and FTC conducted the investigation. Deputy Chief Ted Imperato and Assistant U.S. Attorney John Pearson are prosecuting the case.
An indictment is a formal accusation of criminal conduct, not evidence.
A defendant is presumed innocent unless convicted through due process of law.
HOUSTON – Acting Attorney General James McHenry has named Nicholas J. Ganjei as U.S. Attorney of the Southern District of Texas (SDTX). “I am humbled by the honor and am excited to lead the SDTX,” said Ganjei. “This opportunity to once again serve the American people is both a tremendous responsibility and a great privilege. This office will play a critical role in ensuing our border is secure and the American people are kept safe. I look forward to working alongside some great prosecutors, staff and law enforcement partners.”
U.S. District Judge Drew Tipton swore in Ganjei just after 12 p.m. before SDTX staff, several federal judges and court personnel.Ganjei is a former longtime federal prosecutor who previously served as acting U.S. Attorney and First Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Texas.He joined the Department of Justice in 2008 as an Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA) on the U.S. – Mexico border. As an AUSA, Ganjei prosecuted organized crime, immigration, narcotics and human trafficking cases, as well as fraud, public corruption and white collar matters. As U.S. Attorney, Ganjei will be the chief law enforcement officer for one of the largest district in the United States. The SDTX typically prosecutes more cases against more defendants than most other USAOs nationwide, representing 43 counties and nine million people and covering 44,000 square miles. This district currently comprises seven U.S. District Court divisions with federal district courts in Houston, Galveston, Victoria, Corpus Christi, Brownsville, McAllen and Laredo. The U.S. Attorney's office, headquartered in Houston, has branch offices in all seven divisions.Before joining the Department, Ganjei clerked for the Honorable Richard Allen Griffin and Ralph R. Erickson of the Sixth and Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, respectively. Ganjei has also taught on the subjects of civil, criminal and constitutional law at both the collegiate and law school level.Most recently, Ganjei was chief counsel to U.S. Senator Ted Cruz and the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Constitution, where he oversaw all legal matters related to criminal justice, border security, judicial nominations, antitrust, intellectual property and religious liberty.
HOUSTON – Omar Faraj Saeed Al Hardan, the 25-year-old refugee who was born in Iraq and resided in Houston, has been ordered to federal prison for 16 years following his conviction of attempting to provide material support or resources to a designated foreign terrorist organization. He pleaded guilty Oct. 17, 2016.
Acting U.S. Attorney Abe Martinez, Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security Dana Boente, Special Agent in Charge Perrye K. Turner of the FBI’s Houston Division and Special Agent in Charge Mark Dawson of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) in Houston made the announcement.
“Any person who provides material support to a foreign terrorist organization will be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” said Martinez. “Al Hardan’s actions were treacherous and completely antithetical to the freedoms we as U.S. citizens value. The sentence imposed today reflects the Department of Justice’s resolve to seek out and punish all violators who would give aid and comfort to international terrorists.”
Today, U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes, who accepted the guilty plea, handed Al Hardan a 192-month sentence. He will also be on supervised release for the rest of his life.
At the time of his plea, Al Hardan had admitted he attempted to provide material support – specifically himself – to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). Al Hardan entered the United States as a refugee on or about Nov. 2, 2009. Prior to entering the country, Al Hardan was in at least two refugee camps in Jordan and Iraq. After being admitted into the U.S. as an Iraqi refugee, he was granted legal permanent residence status on or about Aug. 22, 2011, and had resided in Houston.
In 2013, federal agents began investigating Al Hardan who had been communicating with a California man whom he understood was associated with the Al-Nusrah Front. In those communications, the individual had told Al Hardan that he had previously traveled to Syria to fight for Al-Nusrah and discussed plans to return to Syria with Al Hardan to fight for Al-Nusrah.
Beginning in June 2014 and continuing through 2015, Al Hardan also developed a relationship with a Confidential Human Source (CHS). During that time, they discussed traveling overseas to support ISIL in fighting jihad and various ways to assist ISIL. Al Hardan also said he wanted to be trained in building remote transmitter/receiver detonators for improvised explosive devices, wanted to learn to use cell phones as the remote detonators and wanted to build remote detonators for ISIL. Al Hardan indicated he taught himself how to make remote detonators by accessing online training videos and other resources he found online and showed the CHS a circuit board he built to be used as a transmitter for a detonator.
On Nov. 5, 2014, Al Hardan took an oath of loyalty to ISIL. Two days later, Al Hardan and the CHS participated in approximately one hour of tactical weapons training with an AK-47 that Al Hardan indicated he wanted.
During the investigation, Al Hardan had also posted many statements on social media in support of ISIL. One of those included a photo of a Humvee with an ISIL flag. Above the photo, Al Hardan posted, “ISIS yesterday in Iraq, today in Syria and Allah willing, tomorrow in Jerusalem.” He also made numerous statements about his plans to travel to Syria and fight alongside ISIL and become a martyr. In one instance he said “I want to blow myself up. I want to travel with the Mujahidin. I want to travel to be with those who are against America. I am against America.”
Upon his arrest in January 2016, investigators discovered training CDs on how to build remote detonators, electronic circuitry components, tools used to build circuitry, multiple cell phones (that had not been activated), a prayer list for committing Jihad and becoming a martyr and the ISIL flag.
Al Hardan has been and will remain in custody pending transfer to a U.S. Bureau of Prisons facility to be determined in the near future.
The FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force and HSI conducted the investigation with the assistance of the Houston Police Department. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Ted Imperato, Carolyn Ferko and S. Mark McIntyre prosecuted the case.
HOUSTON – Attorney General Merrick B. Garland has appointed U.S. Attorney Alamdar S. Hamdani to serve on the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee of U.S. Attorneys (AGAC).
The AGAC was created in 1973 and advises the Attorney General on matters of policy, procedure and management impacting the offices of the U.S. Attorneys and elevates the voices of U.S. Attorneys on essential matters facing the Department of Justice.
“U.S. Attorneys work every day throughout the country to advance our mission of upholding the rule of law, keeping our country safe, and protecting civil rights,” said Garland. “I am grateful for the perspective the newest members of the committee will provide on behalf of federal prosecutors across the country and the communities they serve.”
“It is an honor to be chosen to serve on the AGAC,” said Hamdani. “I look forward to learning from and serving with my fellow AGAC members as we advise the Attorney General and the Department of Justice’s leadership.”
U.S. Attorney Hamdani will serve alongside chair Damian Williams of the Southern District of New York, vice chair Gary Restaino for the District of Arizona and newest members Alexander M.M. Uballez for the District of New Mexico, Breon Peace for the Eastern District of New York, Kenneth Parker for the Southern District of Ohio, Natalie K. Wight for the District of Oregon, Eric G. Olshan for the Western District of Pennsylvania and Christopher R. Kavanaugh for the Western District of Virginia as well as Ryan Buchanan of the Northern District of Georgia, Gregory K. Harris of the Central District of Illinois, Andrew M. Luger of the District of Minnesota and Darcie N. McElwee of the District of Maine.
President Biden nominated Hamdani to serve as U.S. Attorney for this district Nov. 14, 2002, upon the recommendation of U.S. Senators John Cornyn and Ted Cruz. The full Senate unanimously confirmed his appointment Dec. 6, 2022. He was sworn in Dec. 12, 2022.
As U.S. Attorney, Hamdani is the chief federal law enforcement officer in the Southern District of Texas (SDTX), responsible for prosecuting and defending the interests of the United States in the seventh largest district in the nation.
Hamdani has been with the Department of Justice since 2008. Most recently, he has been an Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA) with the SDTX, primarily responsible for the investigation and prosecution of national security and official corruption crimes. From 2010 to 2014, Hamdani served in the Counterterrorism Section of the Department of Justice’s National Security Division, holding the position of deputy chief from 2012 to 2014. Prior to that, he was an AUSA in the Eastern District of Kentucky.
The SDTX typically prosecutes more cases against more defendants than most other U.S. Attorney’s Offices nationwide, representing 43 counties and nine million people and covering 44,000 square miles. This district currently comprises seven U.S. District Court divisions with federal district courts in Houston, Galveston, Victoria, Corpus Christi, Brownsville, McAllen and Laredo. The U.S. Attorney's office, headquartered in Houston, has branch offices in all seven divisions.
HOUSTON – A 45-year-old man has received additional prison time for threatening to kill a Texas federal judge, announced U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick. Charles M. Gilmore Jr., a former resident of Missouri, pleaded guilty Feb. 20, 2018.
Today, Chief U.S. District Judge Lee H. Rosenthal handed Gilmore a 120-month sentence. The sentence will begin following completion of a seven-year-term he must serve from Missouri state court and another 120 months in Northern District of Texas federal court. Following those sentences and the new 10-year-term received today, Gilmore will also serve three years of supervised release.
As part of his plea, Gilmore admitted that on or about Jan. 25, 2017, he knowingly mailed a communication threatening to kill a federal judge in the Northern District of Texas. He mailed the letter to the Federal Detention Center in Houston with a return address implicating Gilmore who was incarcerated at the time.
In the letter, Gilmore said he was going to kill the federal judge, promising to “make the streets run red in Texas.” He also included a white powdery substance, but it tested negative for any bioterrorism agents.
During an interview with law enforcement, Gilmore admitted to mailing the letter and reiterated his intent to kill the federal judge.
He has been and will remain in custody.
The FBI conducted the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorney Ted Imperato is prosecuting the case.
McALLEN, Texas – Chief U.S. District Judge Randy Crane has sworn in Alamdar S. Hamdani as the 24th presidentially-appointed U.S. Attorney (USA) for the Southern District of Texas (SDTX). He began his duties immediately. As the USA for the SDTX, Hamdani is the chief law enforcement officer responsible for prosecuting and defending the interests of the United States in the seventh largest district in the nation.
He is the first Asian American to hold such office in the SDTX.
Hamdani took the oath of office at 10 a.m. today before an audience including Judge Crane’s staff, federal court personnel, federal public defender and Assistant U.S. Attorneys and staff. Calling it an honor to administer the oath to Hamdani, Judge Crane mentioned the sacrifices of public service and that serving as USA commands respect. He further explained the shared responsibility of moving cases through the process and working together to ensure people are fairly and efficiently treated in our justice system.
Jennifer B. Lowery, who had served as the acting, then court-appointed USA since the departure of former USA Ryan K. Patrick, commented on Hamdani’s background and how the office is happy to have him. She noted that Hamdani said he was “excited to get started.”
Hamdani thanked the previous leadership and described wanting to carry on the traditions he had learned. He spoke of former USA Don DeGabrielle, who spoke at his AUSA orientation almost 15 years ago, and how he taught him about the high standards expected of a federal prosecutor.
Hamdani also spoke of the last eight years as an AUSA with the SDTX as a “dream come true.” He explained that just to represent the United States is one of the greatest things of his career. He told the audience of how he came to this country as an immigrant from England almost 40 years ago and cited the beauty of being a part of this great country.
In swearing in Hamdani today, Judge Crane noted the job would not be an easy one, stating that the SDTX is a large district which carried a tremendous responsibility. He thanked Hamdani for traveling to the McAllen office for the oath and that he was looking forward to working with him.
Information about a possible media availability will be provided at a later date.
President Biden nominated Hamdani to serve as USA for this district Nov. 14, upon the recommendation of U.S. Senators John Cornyn and Ted Cruz. The full Senate unanimously confirmed his appointment Dec. 6.
Hamdani has been with the Department of Justice since 2008. Most recently, he has been an AUSA with the SDTX, primarily responsible for the investigation and prosecution of national security and official corruption crimes. From 2010 to 2014, Hamdani served in the Counterterrorism Section of the Department of Justice’s National Security Division, holding the position of deputy chief from 2012 to 2014. Prior to that, he was an AUSA in the Eastern District of Kentucky.
Prior to his government service, Hamdani was a partner at the law firm of Hamdani & Simon LLP in Texas from 2005 to 2008 where he litigated corporate disputes and civil rights matters. In 2003, he helped form the South Asian Bar Association of North America, holding various leadership positions in the organization, including president from 2007 to 2008. From 2001 to 2005, Hamdani was an associate attorney in the Houston office of the law firm Winstead P.C.
During his tenure as an AUSA with the SDTX, Hamdani was also an adjunct professor at the University of Houston Law Center.
Hamdani received his J.D. from the University of Houston Law Center in 1999 and his B.B.A. from the University of Texas at Austin in 1993.
The SDTX, 7th largest in terms of personnel, typically prosecutes more cases against more defendants than most other USAOs nationwide, representing 43 counties and nine million people and covering 44,000 square miles. This district currently comprises seven U.S. District Court divisions with federal district courts in Houston, Galveston, Victoria, Corpus Christi, Brownsville, McAllen and Laredo. The U.S. Attorney's office, headquartered in Houston, has branch offices in all seven divisions.
HOUSTON – A Texas City woman who was granted clemency by the former presidential administration has been ordered back to federal prison for violating the terms of her supervised release, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Abe Martinez.
A federal jury convicted Carol Denise Richardson, 49, of Texas City, for conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute 50 grams or more of cocaine base as well as two counts of possession with the intent to distribute cocaine base. On June 16, 2006, U.S. District Judge Keith P. Ellison noted her extensive criminal history and ordered her to federal prison for the rest of her life.
However, former U.S. President Barack Obama granted Richardson clemency in early 2016. On July 28, 2016, she was released from the U.S. Bureau of Prisons and placed on supervised release for a term of 10 years. During that time, she is required to abide be several conditions or face a return to prison for up to the remainder of that term. Less than a year after her release, Richardson has committed five separate violations of those terms.
On April 13, 2017, she was arrested by the Pasadena Police Department for theft. Not only was that a commission of a law violation, but she is also required to report any law enforcement contact to her probation officer within 72 hours, which she failed to do. She has also failed to maintain regular contact with the U.S. Probation Office and failed to report that she had been terminated from her employment with Home Health Providers for abandoning her position. She also failed to report a change in her residence. In fact, as of May 15, 2017, attempts to reach her were unsuccessful, and her whereabouts were unknown.
Richardson was later located and arrested May 31, 2017, for violating the terms of her federal supervised release. At the hearing today, the government presented evidence in support of her return to prison. “This defendant was literally given a second chance to become a productive member of society and has wasted it,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney Ted Imperato. “She has clearly shown a willful disregard for the law and must face the consequences for her crimes and actions.”
Judge Ellison expressed his disappointment with the defendant, noting that she had wasted the extremely rare opportunity she was given. He then ordered her back to federal prison for 14 months. After serving her sentence, she will again be placed on similar terms of supervised release for five years.
HOUSTON – A 25-year-old man has been taken into custody for attempting to maliciously damage or destroy property receiving federal financial assistance, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Abe Martinez.
A criminal complaint was filed in Houston federal court today charging Andrew Schneck, of Houston. He made his initial appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Mary Milloy this morning, at which time he was temporarily ordered into custody upon the government’s request pending a detention hearing set for Thursday, Aug. 24 at 2:00 p.m.
According to the complaint, on the evening of Aug. 19, 2017, a Houston park ranger observed Schneck kneeling among the bushes in front of the General Dowling Monument located in Hermann Park in Houston. Schneck was allegedly holding two small boxes with various items inside to include what appeared to be duct tape and wires. After placing the boxes on the ground per the ranger’s request, Schneck then allegedly took a drink from plastic bottle but immediately spit it on the ground. The ranger then noticed a timer and wires in the box and notified the Houston Police Department (HPD), according to the complaint.
The clear liquid was field tested as was a white powdery substance found in a small, black aluminum tube which revealed they were most likely nitroglycerin and Hexamethylene triperoxide diamine (HMTD), respectively, according to the charges. HMTD is a high explosive organic compound used as an initiating, or primary explosive. Nitroglycerin has been used as an active ingredient in the manufacture of explosives. ln its pure form, nitroglycerin is a contact explosive, with physical shock causing it to explode, which degrades over time to even more unstable forms. Nitroglycerin is highly dangerous to transport or use. ln its undiluted form, it is one of the world's most powerful explosives.
Authorities believe the items in Schneck’s possession on Aug. 19 were capable to produce a viable explosive device, according to the charges.
The complaint further alleges that Schneck conducts “chemistry experiments” at his Houston residence.
The City of Houston receives federal financial assistance for maintenance of Hermann Park where the General Dowling Monument is located.
If convicted, Schneck faces a minimum of five and up to 40 years in federal prison and a possible $250,000 maximum fine.
The FBI and HPD are conducting the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorneys S. Mark McIntyre and Ted Imperato are prosecuting the case.
A criminal complaint is a formal accusation of criminal conduct, not evidence.
A defendant is presumed innocent unless convicted through due process of law.
HOUSTON – A federal judge has returned a guilty verdict against a local man for making threats to injure a U.S. senator, announced U.S. Attorney Alamdar S. Hamdani.
U.S. District Judge Lee H. Rosenthal, after careful deliberation, found Issac Ambe Nformangum, 24, guilty on one count of interstate communications with a threat to injure following a two-hour stipulated bench trial.
Nformangum called the senator’s office from his cellular phone and left a lengthy threatening message. He stated the senator would be found and killed.
The court heard evidence that Nformangum made a direct threat intended for the senator in which he disregarded the extent of the seriousness of his words.
“Nformangum called the office of a U.S. senator and made threatening comments.” said Hamdani. “It was a frightening call. This is never acceptable, and the Southern District of Texas will always seek to hold actors like Nformangum to account for their actions, to deter others like him, to protect the rule of law and to ensure a safe environment for all public servants. Today’s guilty verdict demonstrates that dedication.”
“You can criticize, refute and disagree with someone’s political view or vote, but you don’t get to threaten an elected official with violence just because you don’t like their political platform,” said Special Agent in Charge Douglas Williams of the FBI Houston field office. “Those actions are not protected under the Constitution. On the contrary, as Mr. Nformangum found out, they’re a crime.”
Judge Rosenthal has set sentencing for Oct. 2. At that time, Nformangum faces up five years in prison and a possible $250,000 maximum fine.
He has been and will remain in custody pending transfer to a U.S. Bureau of Prisons facility to be determined in the near future.
FBI-Houston conducted the investigation with assistance from the Fort Bend County Sheriff’s Office. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Ted Imperato and Craig M. Feazel are prosecuting the case.
McALLEN, Texas – Four local residents and two Mexican nationals have been ordered to federal prison for their respective roles in laundering drug proceeds, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Abe Martinez.
Roosevelt Faz, 49, and Ted Cantu, 48, both of Donna; Sandra Haro, 37, of Edinburg; Maria Elena Bonilla-Torres, 41, of Puente de Camciclan, Nayarit, Mexico; Guillermo Trevino, 44, of Weslaco; and Erwin Rolando Contreras-Mata, 27, of Reynosa, Tamaulipas, Mexico, all pleaded guilty Aug. 31, 2016.
U.S. District Judge Micaela Alvarez ordered Faz to serve a 140-month sentence, while Haro, Trevino and Bonilla-Torres will serve 130, 80 and 72 months in prison, respectively, at a hearing that concluded late yesterday. Judge Alvarez also ordered Faz, Trevino and Haro to pay a money forfeiture of $1,825,000. An additional $1,028,006 was seized during the investigation. The forfeiture order was the result of two days of testimony and evidence presented Oct. 24 and 31, 2016, which established that this group had been working together to launder drug proceeds since 2014 and that they had successfully laundered the additional $1,825,000. Also sentenced yesterday were Contreras-Mata and Cantu who were ordered to serve 46 and 38 months in prison, respectfully.
At the time of his plea, Faz admitted to coordinating the pick-up of drug proceeds in cities such as Atlanta, Georgia, and St. Louis, Missouri, and that he did so for Javier Reyna, another indicted defendant. Cantu and Trevino were truck drivers who admitted to picking up proceeds in Atlanta and St. Louis, respectively, at Faz’s direction. Contreras-Mata picked up drug proceeds from Faz on behalf of Javier Reyna. Bonilla-Torres handled the stash house in McAllen owned by Haro where the drug proceeds were stored prior to being smuggled into to Mexico, while Haro admitted to handling the communications between Reyna and the individual receiving the money in Mexico.
Cantu and Contreras-Mata each agreed to forfeit the money seized directly from them in the course of the investigation as part of their respective plea agreements.
Bonilla-Torres and Contreras-Mata have been and will remain in custody. Faz and Haro were taken into custody following the hearing yesterday, while Trevino and Cantu were permitted to remain on bond and voluntarily surrender to a U.S. Bureau of Prisons facility to be determined in the near future.
Javier Reyna, 44, of Penitas, is considered a fugitive and a warrant remains outstanding for his arrest. Anyone with information about his whereabouts is asked to contact the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in McAllen at 956-992-8400.
The DEA, Texas Department of Public Safety, IRS-Criminal Investigation and Border Patrol conducted the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force investigation dubbed Operation Emerald Chariots. Assistant U.S. Attorney Juan F. Alanis is prosecuting the case.
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The number of days from the earlier of filing date or first appearance date to proceeding date
Format: N3
Description: The number of days from proceeding date to disposition date
Format: N3
Description: The number of days from disposition date to sentencing date
Format: N3
Description: The code of the district office where the case was terminated
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant at the time the case was closed
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense that carried the most severe disposition and penalty under which the defendant was disposed
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE1
Format: N4
Description: A code indicating whether the prison sentence associated with TTITLE1 was concurrent or consecutive in relation to the other counts in the indictment or information or multiple counts of the same charge
Format: A4
Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N4
Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N3
Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE1
Format: N8
Description: The total prison time for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and prison time was imposed
Format: N4
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY
Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2
Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3
Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5
Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2
Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18
Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15
Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7
Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3
Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1
Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2
Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5
Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: The number of days from the earlier of filing date or first appearance date to proceeding date
Format: N3
Description: The number of days from proceeding date to disposition date
Format: N3
Description: The number of days from disposition date to sentencing date
Format: N3
Description: The code of the district office where the case was terminated
Format: A2
Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant at the time the case was closed
Format: N2
Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense that carried the most severe disposition and penalty under which the defendant was disposed
Format: A20
Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4
Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE1
Format: A3
Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2
Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE1
Format: N4
Description: A code indicating whether the prison sentence associated with TTITLE1 was concurrent or consecutive in relation to the other counts in the indictment or information or multiple counts of the same charge
Format: A4
Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N4
Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N3
Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE1
Format: N8
Description: The total prison time for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and prison time was imposed
Format: N4
Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8
Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1
Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1
Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10
Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2
Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD
Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
HOUSTON – Chief U.S. District Judge Lee H. Rosenthal has sworn in Ryan K. Patrick as the 23rd presidentially-appointed United States Attorney for the Southern District of Texas (SDTX). He began his duties immediately. As the United States Attorney for the SDTX, Patrick is the chief law enforcement officer responsible for prosecuting and defending the interests of the United States in the seventh largest district in the nation.
Patrick, of Houston, took the oath of office at 8:45 a.m. today before an audience including Judge Rosenthal’s staff, federal court personnel and Assistant U.S. Attorneys and staff. Upon administering the oath, Judge Rosenthal noted his energy, commenting that as soon as receiving his Presidential commission, Patrick called her saying, “I’m ready. When can we do this?”
Information about a possible media availability will be provided at a later date.
President Trump nominated Patrick to serve as U.S. Attorney for this district on Nov. 2, 2017, upon the recommendation of U.S. Senators John Cornyn and Ted Cruz. The full Senate unanimously confirmed his appointment on Dec. 20, 2017.
Patrick began his a career as an Assistant District Attorney in Harris County. During that time, he was responsible for the prosecution of narcotics trafficking cases and illegal pill mill operations in the Major Offenders Division.
In 2012, then Texas Governor Rick Perry appointed Patrick to be a judge at the 177th state district court. He was elected to a full four-year-term in 2012.
Prior to his current position, Patrick was in private practice, serving as the managing partner of The Law Office of Ryan Patrick PLLC and senior counsel with HooverSlovacek LLC where he focused on felony criminal defense work.
In swearing Patrick in today, Judge Rosenthal noted the job would not be an easy one, stating that the SDTX is not an easy district. She explained that the SDTX is on the front lines due to geography, time and politics which was never more true than it is now. She further commented that the job is one of the most challenging out there, but told the audience that “he is good to go!”
The SDTX, 7th largest in terms of personnel, typically prosecutes more cases against more defendants than most other USAOs nationwide, representing 43 counties and 8.3 million people and covering 44,000 square miles. This district currently comprises seven U.S. District Court divisions with federal district courts in Houston, Galveston, Victoria, Corpus Christi, Brownsville, McAllen and Laredo. The United States Attorney's office, headquartered in Houston, has five additional branch offices in Corpus Christi, Brownsville, McAllen, Laredo and Victoria to staff all seven divisions.
McALLEN, Texas – A 20-year-old Mission man has been ordered to federal prison for obstructing justice by threatening communication and assault on a federal officer, announced U.S. Attorney Alamdar S. Hamdani.
Hector Reyes Jr. pleaded guilty March 18,2024.
Chief U.S. District Judge Randy Crane has now ordered him to serve 30 months in federal prison to be immediately followed by one year of supervised release.
“The Gulf Cartel is a brutal and violent organization, one that this office seeks to disrupt and dismantle,” said Hamdani. “So, there is no patience in my office when criminals, like Reyes, use the cartels to intimidate law enforcement and scare witnesses. We take such attempts seriously and will vigorously pursue those who, through such intimidation, seek to subvert our system of justice.”
At the time of his plea, Reyes admitted he had uploaded a threatening message from Commandante Siete, a high-ranking member of the Gulf Cartel to SnapChat. This message was transmitted on handheld radios the Gulf Cartel used and warned certain people to stand down while they still “had time.”
Reyes posted this message intending to intimidate individuals who were searching for his father and hoped that it would impede his arrest. He also wanted the message to intimidate those individuals intending to cooperate with the government.
Reyes also admitted that after a detention hearing for another individual, he spit at a federal officer in the courthouse parking lot. Reyes also admitted that in a jail house phone call he had bragged to his father that the agent had gotten scared, in part because of the things that were said at the detention hearing.
Drug Enforcement Administration, FBI, Homeland Security Investigations, and IRS Criminal Investigation conducted the Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Force investigation with the assistance of local task force officers. OCDETF identifies, disrupts and dismantles the highest-level drug traffickers, money launderers, gangs and transnational criminal organizations that threaten the United States by using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach that leverages the strengths of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies against criminal networks. Additional information about the OCDETF Program can be found on the Department of Justice’s OCDETF webpage. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Patricia Cook Profit and Ted Parran prosecuted the case.
WASHINGTON – Six former Mississippi law enforcement officers were sentenced this week for torturing and abusing two Black men in Rankin County, Mississippi.
Senior District Judge Tom Lee sentenced the defendants to terms in prison ranging from 10 to 40 years.
Christian Dedmon, 29, former Narcotics Investigator of the Rankin County Sheriff’s Office (RCSO), was sentenced to 40 years in prison.
Brett McAlpin, 53, former RCSO Chief Investigator, was sentenced to 27.25 years in prison.
Hunter Elward, 31, former RCSO Deputy, was sentenced to 20 years in prison.
Jeffrey Middleton, 46, former RCSO Lieutenant, was sentenced to 17.5 years in prison.
Daniel Opdyke, 28, former RCSO Deputy, was sentenced to 17.5 years in prison.
Joshua Hartfield, 32, former Narcotics Investigator for the Richland Police Department, was sentenced to 10 years in prison.
“The depravity of the crimes committed by these defendants cannot be overstated, and they will now spend between 10 and 40 years in prison for their heinous attack on citizens they had sworn to protect,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. “These defendants kicked in the door of a home where two Black men were residing, handcuffed and arrested them without probable cause, called them racial slurs, and punched, kicked, tased, and assaulted them. After one of the defendants fired his gun in the mouth of one of the victims, breaking his jaw, the defendants gathered outside to come up with a cover story as the victim lay bleeding on the floor. Officers who violate constitutional rights will be held accountable by the Justice Department for their crimes that harm individual victims and betray the trust of entire communities. I am grateful to the Department’s Civil Rights Division, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Mississippi, the FBI Jackson Field Office, and our state partners for their outstanding work bringing these defendants to justice.”
“It is hard to imagine a more atrocious set of civil rights violations than those carried out by the defendants in this case,” said FBI Director Christopher Wray. “But it is also hard to imagine more important work than investigating those crimes and seeking justice for the victims. As the result of the bureau’s color-of-law investigation, which we worked in collaboration with our federal and state partners, all six pleaded guilty last August and will serve lengthy sentences for their crimes.”
“By holding these officers accountable, we are sending a clear message that law enforcement abuse of Black people, or any American, will not be tolerated in our country,” said Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “These six white law enforcement officers sought to dehumanize two innocent Black men through cruel, violent, and lawless abuse. The defendants didn’t count on the victims’ courage to come forward and tell the truth or the justice system to hold them accountable. The court imposed severe sentences reflecting the defendants’ savagery, including the longest federal sentence in recent years for a civil rights police misconduct case. Justice demands accountability, especially when the defendants’ actions not only scarred the victims physically and emotionally, but also harmed the entire community, stripping away their sense of security, corroding trust and respect for the police.”
“We expect our law enforcement officers to take seriously their oath to be our protectors, but these defendants instead chose to be predators on a hate-fueled power trip,” said U.S. Attorney Todd Gee for the Southern District of Mississippi. “Rather than serving Mississippi, the defendants treated it as a place where they could assault, intimidate, torture, and frame their victims at will. These violations of civil rights should serve as a reminder that we still have a lot of work to do in Mississippi and this nation to ensure that law enforcement officers are properly hired, trained, equipped, supervised, and held accountable for their actions.”
“We hold positions of trust and serve as stewards of authority for the community. Color of law violations are harmful to the victims, to the American people, and to the law enforcement community across the globe,” said Acting Special Agent in Charge Maher Dimachkie of the FBI Jackson Field Office. “These six individuals violated their oaths and disgraced other law enforcement officers that carry their duties with pride and honor. We will continue to execute our duties to the highest level of ethical and moral values. We will continue to work with our community partners to rebuild and strengthen the partnership and trust in law enforcement. The FBI remains steadfast in aggressively investigating and bringing those who misuse their authority to justice.”
“The six officers who committed these heinous acts caused more than physical harm to these two individual victims; they severed the vital trust between law enforcement and the people they pledge to protect,” said Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch. “This abuse of power will not be tolerated. I am proud of this joint effort and shared commitment across agencies to pursue truth and justice for these victims. It is my hope and prayer that we can help these victims on their healing journey, and we can restore confidence in our criminal justice system.”
“The sentencing of the six former officers who violated their oath of office proves the effectiveness of collaboration between state and federal law enforcement agencies and prosecutors,” said Commissioner Sean Tindell of the Mississippi Department of Public Safety. “As we move forward, we should all work together creating new policies and oversights to help prevent these types of incidents in the future. Thank you to all parties involved for their diligent work in ensuring that justice was served for the victims.”
Last year, the six defendants pleaded guilty to a criminal information charging them with a total of 13 felony offenses, including civil rights conspiracy, deprivation of rights under color of law, discharge of a firearm during a crime of violence, conspiracy to obstruct justice, and obstruction of justice.
According to court documents and the plea hearings, the defendants admitted that on Jan. 24, 2023, Dedmon sent a group message to Middleton, Elward, and Opdyke, three members of the “Goon Squad,” orchestrating a “mission” to forcibly enter a home in Braxton, Rankin County, Mississippi, where two Black men, M.J. and E.P., were residing. “The Goon Squad” is a group of RCSO officers who were known for using excessive force and not reporting it. Dedmon warned the officers that there might be surveillance cameras at the house, and told them “no bad mugshots”, meaning that the officers should use excessive force, but they should make sure not to leave any marks that would be captured in a mugshot.
Upon arrival at the home, the defendants kicked in the door and entered the home without a warrant or any exigent circumstances. The defendants handcuffed and arrested the men without probable cause to believe they had committed any crime, called them racial slurs, and warned them to stay out of Rankin County. Dedmon fired his gun twice to intimidate the men. Further, the defendants punched and kicked the men; tased them 17 times; held them down and poured liquids on their faces, forcing them to involuntarily ingest these liquids; threw eggs at them and assaulted them with a dildo. McAlpin, the senior officer on the scene, failed to intervene to stop the torture or abuse and stole property while the incident occurred.
At the conclusion of the incident, Elward surreptitiously removed a bullet from the chamber of his gun, forced the gun into M.J.’s mouth, and pulled the trigger. The unloaded gun clicked but did not fire. Elward racked the slide, intending to dry-fire a second time. When Elward pulled the trigger, the gun discharged. The bullet lacerated M.J.’s tongue, broke his jaw, and exited out of his neck.
As M.J. was bleeding on the floor, the defendants did not provide medical aid, but instead gathered outside the home to devise a false cover story and took steps to corroborate it by planting a BB gun on M.J.; destroying surveillance video, a spent shell casing, and taser cartridges; submitting fraudulent drug evidence to the crime lab; filing false reports; charging M.J. with crimes he did not commit; making false statements to investigators; and pressuring witnesses to stick to the cover story.
For several of the defendants, the incident with M.J. and E.P. was not their first-time abusing Rankin County residents. During a separate incident on Dec. 4, 2022, Dedmon beat and tased a white man and fired a gun near his head to coerce a confession, while Elward and Opdyke failed to intervene. Dedmon then sexually assaulted the man. In connection with that incident, Dedmon, Elward, and Opdyke each also pleaded guilty to a criminal information charging them with three additional federal felony offenses, including deprivation of rights under color of law and discharge of a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence.
The FBI Jackson Field Office investigated the federal case. The Mississippi Bureau of Investigation investigated the state case.
Special Litigation Counsel Christopher J. Perras and Trial Attorney Daniel Grunert of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division; Criminal Chief Erin O. Chalk and Assistant U.S. Attorney Glenda R. Haynes for the Southern District of Mississippi; and Mississippi Deputy Attorney General Mary Helen Wall, who was deputized as a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Mississippi for the federal matter, prosecuted the case.
A federal grand jury in Charleston, West Virginia, returned an indictment today charging five former correctional officers — Mark Holdren, 39; Cory Snyder, 29; Johnathan Walters, 35; Jacob Boothe, 25; and Ashley Toney, 23 — in connection with an assault that resulted in the death of an inmate, identified by the initials Q.B., All five correctional officers, as well as a former lieutenant, Chad Lester, 33, were also charged for covering up of the use of unlawful force.
The indictment alleges that, on March 1, 2022, Holdren, Snyder and Walters conspired with other officers at the Southern Regional Jail in Beaver, West Virginia, to use unlawful force against Q.B. to retaliate for his earlier attempt to leave his assigned pod. The indictment further alleges that Holdren, Snyder and Walters struck and injured Q.B. while he was restrained and handcuffed, and that Boothe and Toney failed to intervene in the unlawful assault, resulting in Q.B.’s death.
The indictment alleges that all six defendants conspired to cover up the use of unlawful force by omitting material information and providing false and misleading information to investigators. The indictment also charges each defendant individually with engaging in misleading conduct toward another person to hinder, delay or prevent the communication of information of the possible commission of a federal offense. Further, the indictment alleges that Walters, Holdren, and Boothe submitted incident reports that contained false and misleading information, as well as omitted the fact that officers had assaulted Q.B. The indictment also charges Lester, Holdren, Snyder, Toney and Boothe with making false statements to the FBI about the circumstances surrounding Q.B.’s death.
The maximum penalties are life in prison for each of the civil rights offenses, five years in prison for each of the false statement offenses, and twenty years in prison for each of the remaining offenses.
Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, U.S. Attorney William S. Thompson for the Southern District of West Virginia and FBI Special Agent in Charge Michael D. Nordwall of the FBI Pittsburgh Field Office made the announcement.
The FBI Pittsburgh Field Office investigated the case.
Deputy Chief Christine M. Siscaretti and Trial Attorney Matthew Tannenbaum of the Civil Rights Division’s Criminal Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Monica Coleman for the Southern District of West Virginia are prosecuting the case.
An indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
NEWNAN, Ga. - Arthur Gene Young, a multi-convicted felon with a history of violence, has been sentenced to federal prison for unlawfully possessing a firearm while resisting police officers in a small west Georgia city. “Armed felons cannot be allowed to terrorize the citizens of our district,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Richard S. Moultrie, Jr. “After Young was arrested with a firearm for the third time in two years, local law enforcement wisely sought federal assistance to ensure he would be removed from the community. We will continue to work with our partners at all levels to protect the public from gun violence and repeat violent offenders.”“The law-abiding citizens of this community are safer because of today’s sentence which will ensure the incarceration of a dangerous criminal and contribute to the restoration of order and peace to this area,” said ATF Special Agent in Charge Benjamin Gibbons. “This sentence sends a direct message to criminals that ATF and our local law enforcement partners will investigate violent criminals and protect citizens.”“The partnership of local, state and federal law enforcement agencies is imperative to help local communities stay safe,” said Bremen Police Department Lieutenant Joshua Newman. “The Bremen Police Department would like to thank all the agencies and law enforcement officers that were involved in this case.”According to Acting U.S. Attorney Moultrie, the charges and other information presented in court: On May 2, 2023, less than a month after his release from state prison for other criminal conduct, Arthur Gene Young shoplifted from a pharmacy located in Bremen, Georgia. He returned to the pharmacy the following morning and argued with the store manager. Police officers responded and, upon learning of the earlier shoplifting incident, escorted Young from the store to arrest him. Young refused to obey the officers’ commands and shouted that he would not go back to prison as he fled the scene. As officers pursued Young through the center of town and towards a church preschool, Young exclaimed that he was armed and demanded to be left alone. As additional officers responded, Young crossed a highway, scaled a berm, and walked onto an active train track. There, he grabbed the wrist and arm of a deputy sheriff who attempted to detain him. Ultimately, Young tripped, giving officers an opportunity to place handcuffs around one of his wrists. But Young fought the officers and refused to comply as the officers attempted to fully cuff him. During the struggle, one of the officers noticed the grip of a loaded 7.65mm semiautomatic pistol in Young’s right pants pocket. The officer managed to secure the weapon before Young was finally handcuffed. As a multi-convicted felon, Young was legally prohibited from possessing firearms. Young’s decade-long criminal record included convictions for crimes of violence, such as attempted robbery by intimidation and terroristic threats, as well as other offenses. Additionally, at the time of his arrest following the incident at the Bremen pharmacy, Young was under indictment and on pretrial release in three cases brought in 2021 and 2022 charging him with attempted armed robbery, attempted robbery by intimidation, and two counts each of felon in possession of a firearm, aggravated assault, and simple assault.Arthur Gene Young, 34, of Bremen, Georgia, was sentenced on April 22, 2025, by Chief U.S. District Judge Timothy C. Batten, Sr. to 14 years in prison to be followed by three years of supervised release. Young was convicted of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person on January 14, 2025, after he pleaded guilty in the middle of a jury trial.This case was investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the Bremen Police Department. The Haralson County Sheriff’s Office, Carroll County Sheriff’s Office, and Georgia State Patrol provided valuable assistance.Assistant United States Attorneys Theodore S. Hertzberg and Amy M. Palumbo prosecuted the case.This case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce violent crime and gun violence, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. On May 26, 2021, the Department launched a violent crime reduction strategy strengthening PSN based on these core principles: fostering trust and legitimacy in our communities, supporting community-based organizations that help prevent violence from occurring in the first place, setting focused and strategic enforcement priorities, and measuring the results.For further information please contact the U.S. Attorney’s Public Affairs Office at USAGAN.PressEmails@usdoj.gov or (404) 581-6280. The Internet address for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Georgia is http://www.justice.gov/usao-ndga.